Certain Belgium company bonds were issued providing for payment of interest "in sterling in gold coin of the United Kingdom of or equal to the weight and fineness existing on September 1, 1928." After England had left the gold: standard the issuing company sought to make interest payments in depreciated pounds. Plaintiff bondholder sought to enforce payment of sufficient depreciated currency to enable him to purchase on the day of payment gold in the same quantity as he would have received had payment been due September 1, 1928. The English House of Lords held for plaintiff, reversing the decision of the Court of Appeal. The court felt that the "gold clause could have no meaning unless it was intended to guard against depreciation of the currency . . . in which the debt was payable." Feist v. Société Intercommunale Belge D'Électricité, reported in: London Times, December 16, 1933, p. 4; New York Times, December 16, 1933, p. 2, and December 31, 1933, p. 7N; U.S. LAW WEEK, January 9, 1934, index p. 397.