WoodtlBNTON J.
order of attachment is to transfer the debt attached absolutely from.the judgment-debtor to the judgment-creditor. In all the latercases, however, this dictum has been explained and distinguished, tosuch an extent that it may fairly be said to haVe been disregarded.In the case 6f Ex parte The * Combined^ Weighing and Advertising’Machine Companyfl it wa6 held that a gamjshee order does notoperate as a .transfer of the debt, which will make the garnishorcreditor of the garnishee, and that its effect is merely to create in hisfavour a lien, which will be subject to all prior equitable rights. Inthe case of Badeley v. Consolidated Bank* the Court of Appeal decidedthat, by virtue of a garnishee order, a creditor can only attach suchproperty of the debtor as the debtor himself could deal with properlyand without violation of the rights of others. In connection withthe same point, I may refer to the case of Ex parte Whitehome,9Qeisse v. Taylor,4 and Norton tt. Yates.6 It is quite true that all thosecases deal with circumstances in which the rights of .third parties'were involved, but I think that the principle underlying them isequally applicable to the case of the garnishee himself, and that adebt whose payment into Court can be enforced under the summaryprovisions of the Civil Procedure Code must be a debt of which thejudgment-debtor could, himself have compelled payment if he haddesired to do so. On this last point I refer to the case of Chattertonv. Watney.6 I.t appears to me that the order appealed against shouldnot have been made and I set it aside.
In view of the difficulty and the importance of the present case Ihave thought it right to deal with the facts and the law applicable to>them in detail. ^
The appeal is allowed with costs.
Appeal allowed.
C.w. ,
» (1890) 43 Ch. D. 99. f .4 (19C6) 2 K. B. 658.
* (1688) 88 Ch. D. 238.<* (1906) l K. B. 112.
.* (1886) 82 Ch. D. 612.* (1881) 16 Ch. D. 979-888.