Tolzey Court

Last updated June 18, 2023

North prospect of the Tolzey of Bristol 1673 Millerd1728dallsaints.jpg — North prospect of the Tolzey of Bristol 1673

The Tolzey Court was a court with civil jurisdiction that was held in the English city of Bristol. First mentioned in 1344, it may have developed out of the borough hundred court. It was originally held in a room on Corn Street but later moved to the Bristol Guildhall on Broad Street. The court absorbed the Mayor's Court and at least one of Bristol's court of piepowders.

The Tolzey Court was limited in jurisdiction to actions arising in Bristol or its liberties and could award costs with no upper limit. It was valued by plaintiffs for its use of some aspects of lex mercatoria law, including the ability to try cases in the absence of a defendant and apply the principle of foreign attachment to recover costs from defendant's debtors. In the Victorian era it commonly used juries, which were otherwise unusual in civil trials. The Tolzey Court became popular in the 1960s as its fees were lower than the High Court or county court. It was prevented from hearing repossession cases by the Protection from Eviction Act 1964 and abolished by the Courts Act 1971.

Origins

The Tolzey Court is said to have originated in the Anglo-Saxon period but is first mentioned by name in 1344.^[1]^[2] It was possibly a development of the borough's original hundred court, which was confirmed in its jurisdiction by the Bristol town charter of 1188.^[3] The Tolzey Court was mentioned by a charter of 1373 that granted additional powers to the Mayor's Court, without affecting the jurisdiction of the Tolzey Court.^[4]^[1] The Tolzey Court is named after a room in a building on Corn Street used for the collection of tolls, and where it presumably first sat, though for much of the medieval era and later it sat in the Bristol Guildhall on Broad Street.^[4] The earliest surviving record of a case in the Tolzey Court held by the National Archives is one relating to rent of a house in Broad Street in 1476.^[1]

By the 15th century the hundred court was in decline and the Tolzey Court sat more frequently, often sitting 3-5 times a week.^[2]^[3] During the town's three annual fair weeks the court did not sit, as a court of piepowders tried offences occurring at the markets.^[2] Later at least one of the piepowders courts was merged into the Tolzey Court.^[4] The Mayor's Court was merged with the Tolzey Court in the mid-18th century.^[1]

Jurisdiction and procedure

The court had jurisdiction over civil disputes where the action leading to the dispute arose within the boundaries of Bristol, or its liberties.^[4] In 1450 an ordinance defined the work of the Bristol courts. The Tolzey Court was to have jurisdiction over all civil matters except those relating to the export of wool, hides and lead which were to be tried at the Court of Staple and in matters of trespass and deceit where the Mayor's Court had jurisdiction.^[5] Bristol was one of the few places, London being another, whereby the King's Justices were excluded from jurisdiction (in Bristol this was by a 1373 charter). The Tolzey Court was therefore entitled to claim precedence over the King's Courts for matters arising within its area.^[6] The Tolzey Court was a court of record and was able to order costs as it saw fit, not being bound by an upper limit.^[1]

The court was originally presided over by the bailiffs of the hundred but when Bristol became a royal residence the court was probably united with that of the palace and presided over by a seneschal or steward of the royal household. It later came under a sheriff and, after their number was increased to two by Henry VII, the court became known as the Sheriffs' Court.^[1] The court was probably brought under the control of the Common Council of Bristol by a 1461 charter of Edward IV.^[1]

The court was attended by a legal officer known as a prothonotary, who probably played a similar role to that of a modern registrar.^[7] The court was authorised by four sergeants at mace, officers who carried out the court's orders, though these only had powers within the area of the court's jurisdiction.^[7]

The court was popular for its adaptability in procedure when compared with common law courts. By the 13th century it had adopted some aspects of lex mercatoria (law merchant) law. In particular it allowed judgements to be made against absent defendants which was not possible under the common law. It also adopted the principle of foreign attachment under which action could be taken to recover costs from debtors of defendants. This was particularly useful where defendants had no recoverable property within the court's jurisdiction and was described by the 1830 prothonotary as a great advantage to citizens of the town.^[7] In cases where the defendant had no property in the court's jurisdiction they, if present, could be detained ahead of trial.^[8]

Post-1835 reform

The court was reformed by the Municipal Corporations Act 1835. The city's sheriff was designated as the presiding officer of the court, though he took no part in the proceedings. The city recorder became the judge of the court and the prothonotary was renamed the registrar. It was common after this time for juries to be used by the court, unusual in civil trials in England and Wales, though this was limited by the Juries Act 1918.^[7]

The court survived in use well into the 20th-century perhaps because of the usefulness of the law merchant and foreign attachment procedures. During the 1960s the court saw a surge in popularity as its court fees were lower than those charged in the High Court or county court; in the first half of 1962 some 275 actions were commenced in the Tolzey Court.^[7] Around this time it became a popular court for landlords' cases, though this ceased when the Protection from Eviction Act 1964 limited repossession actions to the county court. The Tolzey Court was abolished by the Courts Act 1971 and its last hearing took place on 3 December 1971, a claim for repairs to the roof of a house, and was presided over by Recorder Joseph Malony. Many of the court records are held in the Bristol Record Office.^[9]

Related Research Articles

Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.

Strategic lawsuits against public participation, or strategic litigation against public participation, are lawsuits intended to censor, intimidate, and silence critics by burdening them with the cost of a legal defense until they abandon their criticism or opposition.

Admiralty courts, also known as maritime courts, are courts exercising jurisdiction over all maritime contracts, torts, injuries, and offences.

In a civil proceeding or criminal prosecution under the common law or under statute, a defendant may raise a defense in an effort to avert civil liability or criminal conviction. A defense is put forward by a party to defeat a suit or action brought against the party, and may be based on legal grounds or on factual claims.

The courts of England and Wales, supported administratively by His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service, are the civil and criminal courts responsible for the administration of justice in England and Wales.

A justice of the peace (JP) is a judicial officer of a lower or puisne court, elected or appointed by means of a commission to keep the peace. In past centuries the term commissioner of the peace was often used with the same meaning. Depending on the jurisdiction, such justices dispense summary justice or merely deal with local administrative applications in common law jurisdictions. Justices of the peace are appointed or elected from the citizens of the jurisdiction in which they serve, and are usually not required to have any formal legal education in order to qualify for the office. Some jurisdictions have varying forms of training for JPs.

In law, a settlement is a resolution between disputing parties about a legal case, reached either before or after court action begins. A collective settlement is a settlement of multiple similar legal cases. The term also has other meanings in the context of law. Structured settlements provide for future periodic payments, instead of a one time cash payment.

Small-claims courts have limited jurisdiction to hear civil cases between private litigants. Courts authorized to try small claims may also have other judicial functions, and go by different names in different jurisdictions. For example, it may be known as a county or magistrate's court. These courts can be found in Australia, Brazil, Canada, England and Wales, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Greece, New Zealand, Philippines, Scotland, Singapore, South Africa, Nigeria and the United States.

A court of piepowders was a special tribunal in England organized by a borough on the occasion of a fair or market. These courts had unlimited jurisdiction over personal actions for events taking place in the market, including disputes between merchants, theft, and acts of violence. In the Middle Ages, there were many hundreds of such courts, and a small number continued to exist even into modern times. Sir William Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England in 1768 described them as "the lowest, and at the same time the most expeditious, court of justice known to the law of England".

The Federal Court of Canada, which succeeded the Exchequer Court of Canada in 1971, was a national court of Canada that had limited jurisdiction to hear certain types of disputes arising under the federal government's legislative jurisdiction. Originally composed of two divisions, the Appellate Division and the Trial Division, in 2003 the Court was split into two separate Courts, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeal. The jurisdiction and powers of the two courts remained largely unchanged from the predecessor divisions.

The court system of Canada forms the country's judiciary, formally known as "The King on the Bench", which interprets the law and is made up of many courts differing in levels of legal superiority and separated by jurisdiction. Some of the courts are federal in nature, while others are provincial or territorial.

Forum non conveniens (FNC) is a mostly common law legal doctrine through which a court acknowledges that another forum or court where the case might have been brought is a more appropriate venue for a legal case, and transfers the case to such a forum. A change of venue might be ordered, for example, to transfer a case to a jurisdiction within which an accident or incident underlying the litigation occurred and where all the witnesses reside.

The word prothonotary is recorded in English since 1447, as "principal clerk of a court," from L.L. prothonotarius, from Greek protonotarios "first scribe," originally the chief of the college of recorders of the court of the Byzantine Empire, from Greek πρῶτοςprotos "first" + Latin notarius ("notary"); the -h- appeared in Medieval Latin. The title was awarded to certain high-ranking notaries.

The Supreme Court of New South Wales is the highest state court of the Australian State of New South Wales. It has unlimited jurisdiction within the state in civil matters, and hears the most serious criminal matters. Whilst the Supreme Court is the highest New South Wales court in the Australian court hierarchy, an appeal by special leave can be made to the High Court of Australia.

A master is a judge of limited jurisdiction in the superior courts of England and Wales and in numerous other jurisdictions based on the common law tradition. A master's jurisdiction is generally confined to civil proceedings and is a subset of that of a superior court judge or justice. Masters are typically involved in hearing specialized types of trials, case management, and in some jurisdictions dispute resolution or adjudication of specific issues referred by judges.

The Magistrates Court of Queensland is the lowest court in the court hierarchy of Queensland, Australia. All criminal proceedings in Queensland begin in the Magistrates Court, with minor offences being dealt with summarily, and more serious ones being referred to a higher court on the strength of evidence. Most criminal cases are first heard in the Magistrates Court, as are most civil cases. The Magistrates Court hears approximately 95% of all court cases in Queensland.

The Court of Civil Jurisdiction was a court established in the late 18th century, in the colony of New South Wales which subsequently became a state of Australia. The court had jurisdiction to deal with all civil disputes in the then fledgling colony. It was in operation between 1788, the date of establishment of the new colony, and 1814.

The Boston Municipal Court (BMC), officially the Boston Municipal Court Department of the Trial Court, is a department of the Trial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, United States. The court hears criminal, civil, mental health, restraining orders, and other types of cases. The court also has an appellate division which reviews questions of law that arise from civil matters filed in the eight divisions of the department.

The Court of Pleas of the County Palatine of Durham and Sadberge, sometimes called the Court of Pleas or Common Pleas of or at Durham was a court of common pleas that exercised jurisdiction within the County Palatine of Durham until its jurisdiction was transferred to the High Court by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873. Before the transfer of its jurisdiction, this tribunal was next in importance to the Chancery of Durham. The Court of Pleas probably developed from the free court of the Bishop of Durham. The Court of Pleas was clearly visible as a distinct court, separate from the Chancery, in the thirteenth century.

The Court of Common Pleas of the County Palatine of Lancaster, sometimes called the Common Pleas of or at Lancaster was a court of common pleas that exercised jurisdiction within the County Palatine of Lancaster until its jurisdiction was transferred to the High Court by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873. It was a Superior Court of Record, exercising, within the limits of the County Palatine, a jurisdiction similar to that of the superior courts of common law at Westminster.

References

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 "Tolzey Court". National Archives. Archived from the original on 18 September 2020. Retrieved 16 September 2020.
1 2 3 Veale, W. W. (1936). "The Bristol Tolzey Court". Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law: 21. Archived from the original on 18 September 2020. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
1 2 Lyes, John (2006). Bristol's Courts of Law (PDF). London: Bristol Branch of the Historical Association. p. 2. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 June 2020. Retrieved 16 September 2020.
1 2 3 4 Lyes, John (2006). Bristol's Courts of Law (PDF). London: Bristol Branch of the Historical Association. p. 3. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 June 2020. Retrieved 16 September 2020.
↑ Veale, W. W. (1936). "The Bristol Tolzey Court". Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law: 22. Archived from the original on 18 September 2020. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
↑ Veale, W. W. (1936). "The Bristol Tolzey Court". Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law: 23. Archived from the original on 18 September 2020. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
1 2 3 4 5 Lyes, John (2006). Bristol's Courts of Law (PDF). London: Bristol Branch of the Historical Association. p. 5. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 June 2020. Retrieved 16 September 2020.
↑ Veale, W. W. (1936). "The Bristol Tolzey Court". Journal of the Society of Public Teachers of Law: 25. Archived from the original on 18 September 2020. Retrieved 18 September 2020.
↑ Lyes, John (2006). Bristol's Courts of Law (PDF). London: Bristol Branch of the Historical Association. p. 6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 13 June 2020. Retrieved 16 September 2020.