Your World of Legal Intelligence
 United Kingdom | +44 (0) 20 7284 8080

O'Callaghan v Cooper

Nominate Series Cited authorities 2 Cited in Precedent Map Related
Vincent
JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date01 January 1817
Date01 January 1817
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 34 E.R. 889

IN CHANCERY

O'Callaghan
and
Cooper

o'callaghan v. cooper, 5 Ves. 117.-1. In many cases, where consent to a marriage has been given on the offer of a settlement, though the intention may seem to have been, that the settlement should be before marriage, still, a settlement after marriage has been held sufficient ; Dashwood v. Lord .Bulke.ley, 10 Ves. 244 ; for Courts of .Equity are always disposed to be most liberal in the construction of agreements, on the faith of which marriage has taken place, and in enforcing the execution of such agreements on both sides ; see, ante, the note to Luders v. Anstey, 4 V. 501. 2. No costs can bo given to a trustee, whose neglect, caprice, or mistake, has been the solo cause which rendered the suit necessary. Caffrey v. Darby, 6 Ves. 497. Taylor v. (UanvUle, ,'.! Mad. 178. Jones v. Lowin, 1 Cox, 199.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT