Attorney General v The Corporation of Newart
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 24 May 1836 |
| Date | 24 May 1836 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 59 E.R. 28
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Vendor and Purchaser. Costs.
[71] the attorney-general v. the corporation of newark.(!) May 24, 1836. Vendor and Purchaser. Costs. Where an estate has been sold under a decree, and the Master reports against the title, the purchaser is entitled to be paid, out of the fund in the cause, his costs of and consequent upon his becoming purchaser, and of investigating the title. (1) Ex relations. 8 SIM. 72. BARNETT V. GRAFTON 29 By the decree in this cause, a sale before the Master had been directed, and upon the application of the purchaser it was referred to the Master to inquire whether a good title could be made. The Master reported in the negative. Mr. Jacob, for the purchaser, moved that he might be discharged from the purchase, and that his costs, charges and expenses might be paid out of the fund in Court. the solicitor-general, contra. the vice-chancellor considered that the purchaser was entitled to be paid the costs of the orders for confirming him as purchaser of the reference and of the application, and the expense of investigating the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Weir v Chamley
...Ir. Eq. Rep. 200. Hawood v. Bland Fl. & K. 540. Reynolds v. BlakeENR 2 Sim. & St. 117. The Attorney-General v. The Corporation of NewarkENR 8 Sim. 71. 566 CHANCERY REPORTS. 1852. I am of opinion therefore that the receiver was privileged until Rolls. the motion was disposed of on the 7th of......