Bowker v Bull
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 02 December 1850 |
| Date | 02 December 1850 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 61 E.R. 11
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 20 L. J. Ch. 47; 15 Jur. 4. See Dawson v. Bank of Whitehaven, 1877, 4 Ch. D. 650; 6 Ch. D. 218.
Mortgagor and Mortgagee. Principal and Surety. Redemption. Tacking.
[29] bowker v. bull. Nov. 8, Dec. 2, 1850. [S. C. 20 L. J. Ch. 47; 15 Jur. 4. See Dawson v. Bank of Whitehaven, 1877, 4 Oh. D. 650; 6 Ch. D. 218.] Mortgagor and Mortgagee. Principal and Surety. Redemption. Tacking. A. mortgaged his fceehold and copyhold estates and some drainage bonds, and by the same deed his daughters mortgaged their freehold and copyhold estates to B. to secure 6000 lent by B. to A., and the deed declared that, without prejudice to any of the rights or remedies of B., his heirs, executors, &c., as between A., his heirs, executors, &c., on the one hand, and the daughters, and their heirs, executors, &e., on the other hand, A., his heirs, executors, &c., should be primarily liable to the payment of the 6000, and that his freehold and copyhold estates therein comprised should be primarily liable to answer and make good the 6000. Six years afterwards A. mortgaged his freehold and copyhold estates comprised in the prior mortgage, and also the drainage bonds, to B., to secure 700 lent to him by B. Held, that B. was not entitled, as against A.'s daughters, to tack his second mortgage to the first, but that the daughters were entitled to redeem the first mortgage on payment of the 6000. By an indenture, dated the llth of March 1836, the Defendant Bull mortgaged certain pieces of land situate in March, in the Isle of Ely, to Elizabeth Stevens, since deceased, in fee, for securing 400 and interest. By an indenture, dated the 3d of March 1843, he mortgaged the same pieces of land, subject expressly to Mrs. Stevens's security, together with certain copyhold lands and drainage securities, and his wife and two daughters mortgaged certain freehold and copyhold hereditaments, of which the wife was seised for life, with remainder to her daughters in fee, under the will of Eleanor Ward, to the Plaintiff, for securing 5600 and interest: and that indenture, at the end of it, declared that, without prejudice to any of the rights or remedies of the Plaintiff, his heirs, executors, administrators, or assigns, as be-[30]-tween the Defendant Bull, his heirs, executors and administrators on the one hand, and Bull's wife and daughters and their respective heirs, executors and administrators on the other hand, Bull, his heirs, executors and administrators should be primarily liable to the payment of the principal and interest monies intended to be thereby secured; and that the freehold hereditaments thereinbefore described, but not comprising" the hereditaments devised by the will of Eleanor Ward, and the copyhold hereditaments thereinbefore described and covenanted to be surrendered, not comprising any copyhold hereditaments devised by the said will, should be primarily liable to answer and make good the same principal and interest monies. On the 5th of March 1844 the Plaintiff took a transfer of Mrs. Stevens's mortgage. By...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pearl v Deacon
...referred to Newton v. ChorU m(lO Hare, 646), Mayhewv. Crickett (2 Swanst. 185), Gapel v. Butler (2 Sim. & St. 457), Bowker v. Bull (1 Sim. N. S. 29). Mr. Selwyn and Mr. W. R. Ellis, for the Appellants. The Appellants were not precluded by any rule of law or equity from exercising the right ......
-
Vint v Padget
...C. C. 399, where the facts are stated) ; Mackreth \. fly man x (15 Ves. 328) ; Willmghby v. Willmujhby (1 T. R. 763) ; Bowker v. Bull (1 Sim. N. S. 29) ; Otter v. Faux (2 K. & J. 650) ; Pope v. Onslmv (2 Vern. 286) ; /ream v. Denn (2 Cox, 425); Sinclair v. Jackson (15 Beav. 405); Jarman's B......
-
Drew v Lockett
...the mortgagee Evans, and the authorities which are relied on for this, purpose are Williams v. Owen (13 Sim. 597); Sowker v. Bull (1 Sim. (N. S.) 29); and Farebrother v. Wodehause (23 Beav. 18) before me. S 504] But I am of opinion that none of these cases establish the proposition that d b......
-
The Estate of John Fallon Kirkwood, Owner and Petitioner
...JOHN FALLON KIRKWOOD, OWNER AND PETITIONER. Williams v. OwenENR 13 Sim. 597. Farebrother v. WodehouseENR 23 Beav. 29. Bowker v. BullENR 1 Sim. (N. S.) 29. Pearl v. DeaconENR 24 Beav. 126. Dawson v. Bank of Whitehaven 4 App. Div. 639. Drew v. LockettENR 32 Beav. 499. Newton v. ChorltonENR 2 ......