Challoner v Davies
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Date | 01 January 1792 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 91 E.R. 1166
COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
[400] mich. term, 10 will. 3, C. B. 1698. Sir George Treby, Chief Justice. Sir Edward Nevill, Sir John Powell, Sir John Blencoe, Justices. challoner mrs. davies. Intr. Hil. 9 Will. 3, C. B. 1175. Pleadings, Lutw. 565. Post, vol. 3, p. 273. A bargain and sale by tenant for years conveys no possession without actual entry. A bargain and sale by tenant for years and the reversioner operates as a surrender by the tenant, and a bargain and sale by the reversioner. S. C. Lutw. 569. But a Court cannot take notice that it has such operation unless it is either pleaded according thereto. S. C. Lutw. 569. Covenant. The plaintiff declared, that the plaintiff covenanted with the defendant, that the plaintiff, and all other persons having any estate under him, should make sufficient conveyance of certain land to the defendant and his heirs before the seventeenth of November next following; and that the defendant covenanted, that upon such conveyance made to him, he would pay to the plaintiff or his assigns, at the house of Sir Francis Child, London, 3001. and that they mutually bound themselves, &c. in the penalty of 1001. to the performance of the said agreement; and the plaintiff avers, that he was ready to perform all on his part to be performed; and that he and one Markham, who had a lease for years under the plaintiff of the said lands, bargained and sold the said lands to the defendant for one half year, and that the plaintiff, by a release dated the day after, released to the defendant and his heirs all his right, title, &c. of which lease and release the defendant had notice at A. in the county of Bucks, the sixteenth of the said November, and there refused to accept them, and refused to pay the money to the plaintiff secundum formam of the said covenant, &c. Upon which declaration the defendant demurred. ILD.RAYM.401. MICH. TERM, 10 WILL. 3 1167 [401] Birch Serjeant for the defendant argued, that the declaration is not good ; 1. For the plaintiff has not averred, that the lease and release were a sufficient conveyance. 2. The plaintiff has not shewn, that the defendant had notice of the execution of the said conveyance; which ought to have been done, because the defendant waa to pay the money upon the execution of it at Sir Francis Child's house, and therefore the conveyance ought to have been executed there; and in this case it waa executed in Bucks forty miles distant; and therefore it was impassible, that the defendant could pay the money upon the execution at London at the house of Sir Francis Child. But admitting that it might have been executed at another place, the defendant should have had notice of it, or reasonable and sufficient time, before the money was to be paid, which was payable the seventeenth of November, and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v Swindon
...in C. B. is to be sued by writ. An action was brought against Swindon, one of the clerks of Prothonotary 1166 MICH. TERM, 10 WILL. 3 1LD.RAYM.400. Tempest, &c. The defendant pleaded, that he ought to be sued by bill. And it was adjudged not; because the clerks of the prothonotaries of the C......
-
Stainton v Randal
...some one operative word of conveyance, see Monningtm v. William, 1 Vent. 109. Baker v. Lade, 3 Lev. 291. 4 Mod. 149. Challoner v. Dames, 1 Ld. Raym. 400, 404. 1 Lutw. 570. 2 Saund. 97 b, note (2), by Serjeant Williams. Com. Dig. Pleader, C. 37. And see further on pleading conveyances, &c. i......