coke b salmon case Trin Elizabeth rot in the king bench a award that one shall  enter into a bind without name in what sum the bind shall be be void if I  covenant with b to enter into a bind to he for the enjoy of land and do not  express the sum he shall be bind to the value of the land so if there be a  grant of a annuity to one till he be promote to a convenient benefice it shall  be take to mean a benefice of the value of the annuity if a award be that the  husband and wife shall enjoy land and the wife be a stranger to the submission  the award as to her be void SC cro Elizabeth more Vid the entry   Ent pl salk  Fitzgib salmon bring a action on the case on assumpsit and declare that  whereas controversy be between the plaintiff and defendant concern diverse  land in d the defendant in consideration of d assume and promise to pay to the  plaintiff if the defendant do not perform the award of I S c which I S make a  award that the defendant shall enter into a bind to the plaintiff that the  plaintiff and Elizabeth his wife shall enjoy the say land c which he have not  do on which the defendant demurrer and it be adjudge against the plain tiff  and the reason and cause of the judgement be because the award be void for the  coke a uncertainty a style jenk cent march arbitrament roll Rep palm Yelv a  for it do not appear of what sum the bind shall be for the arbitrator be judge  of the case and their judgement and award ought to be certain so that thereby  the controversy be decide and that it shall not for the uncertainty be a cause  of new controversy a a award ought to be certain so that no reasonable doubt  can arise upon the face of it as to the arbitrator meaning or as to the nature  and extent of the duty impose by it upon the party roll abrutus tree Hawkins v  colclough burr and Vid wood v Griffith Swanst S C will c c a award therefore  that one of the party shall have certain tree and that the other shall give  security for such a sum without name the kind of security be void for  uncertainty thin v rigby cro James tippin v smith strange Vid duport v  wildgoose Bulstr a award that one of the party shall pay so much money to the  other as shall be due in conscience be bad lVatson v Watson style so a award  that one of the party shall pay so much as such land be worth per Jones CJ in  Titus v Perkins Skinn so a award that one shall give up a certain obligation  to another without describe it bedam v Clerkson Lord raym or that one shall  deliver up several book without name they Cookson v Ogle Lutw be bad Vid the  judgement of Mansfield CJ in simmonds v swain tandt a award that one shall pay  to the other five pound for quit rend and other small thing have be hold bad  Rudston v Yates march so also a award that one party shall be pay by the other  the money due as well for day work as for task work without name the sum be  have for uncertainty pope v Brett sand Vid Com dig abrutus tree e but a award  that allowance shall be make for money already advance by the party without  specify the amount may or may not be certain accord to the fact whether the  amount of the money advance be a matter in controversy or not Cargie v  Atcheson barn Cress SC dow Ryl affirm on error bing such a award be final upon  the face of it and if the amount of the money advance be a matter in  controversy that ought to be disclose by the plead ib and a award that direct  that one party shall pay to the other all such money as he have expend about  the prosecution of a suit have be hold to be sufficient certain for the amount  will be ascertain by the attorney bill beal v beal cro car so a award that a  certain debt shall be pay by the plaintiff and defendant in proportion to the  share which they several have hold in a certain shop not ascertain what those  share be it not appear that what those share be be a matter of dispute between  the party before the arbitrator be hold good Wohlenberg v Gageman taunt so  also a award that recite that the party be jointtenants of certain land and  that they shall make partition by mutual conveyance be hold good enough  although the award do not specify what moiety or part the one shall have and  what the other knight v Burton Mod a award may be good in part and bad in part  and although a award be have for uncertainty as to one part yet if it be good  in that part upon which the breach be assign and the defendant demurrer  whereby he admit the breach the plaintiff must have judgement fox v smith will  and Vid sergeant williams note pope v Brett where sup Cargie v Atcheson where  sup and when one of two matter be award in the disjunctive and one alternative  be impossible or uncertain that alternative must be take which can be perform  simmonds v swain taunt a and the arbitrator can b Cr Elizabeth b assign their  power over but they coke report b er p themselves ought to determine it and  therefore neither the plaintiff nor the defendant can assess the sum b but a  arbitrator may reserve or delegate his power over a ministerial though not  over a judicial act winch sander case roll Rep Cookson v Ogle Lutw thus a  award that direct that one of the party shall pay a certain sum of money to  the other for every acre to be measure by a able measurer in the presence of  the arbitrator at the rate of so many yard to the pole will perhaps be hold  good for this be only a ministerial act Vid hunter v benison hard but the  point do not appear to have be determine there a award that such a release or  such a security shall be give or such a action bring as counsel shall advice  have be hold good cater v Startute style roll ab arbitr r otherwise of a  release c as a stranger shall advice roll ab arbiter h Emery v Emery cro  Elizabeth so a award that a release shall be give the form of which be to be  settle by one of the master of the court in case the court shall be please to  give direction for that purpose be hold good Lingood v bid atk nor be a award  vitiate by the arbitrator recommend it to the party to consent that a order  may be make by the court of chancery for the appoint a proper person to  receive in the debt due to the partnership ib and arbitrator instead of  ascertain the cost award themselves may refer they to be tax Lingood v bid  where sup winter v garlic salk SC Mod Cargie v Atcheson barn Cress SC dow Ryl  but the taxation must be by the proper officer of the court for the taxation  by he be a ministerial act but by any other it be a judicial act Nolt v long  Cas tempt Hardw SC strange and therefore it will seem that the arbitrator must  assess the cost of a action in a inferior court for there may be no proper  officer to tax they Addison v grey will a arbitrator may take advantage of the  judgement of a person complete skill for by adoption the judgement be the  arbitrator Soulsby v Hodgson burr S c black Rep Emery v ware Ves b but it be  agree that if I covenant with b to enter into a bind to he for the enjoy of  such land and do not express what sum he shall be bind in such sum as amount  to the a Cr Elizabeth a value of the land as it be agree in e if a man grant a  annuity to one of mark till he be promote to a convenient benefice the law  will expound it to be of the value of the b Cr Elizabeth b annuity or coke  report a er p more but the reason of that be because it be the act of the  covenantor himself which can be void but it be otherwise in the case at bar  also the award be void as to the wife for she be c roll Cr Elizabeth more Cr  car roll Rep kelw a Leon hut hard Yelv hetley Styl godb   b Mod c a stranger  to the submission notam bene