Colegrave against Dias Santos

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date12 June 1823
Date12 June 1823
CourtCourt of the King's Bench

English Reports Citation: 107 E.R. 311

IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.

Colegrave against Dias Santos

S. C. 3 D. & R. 255; L. J. K. B. O. S. 239. Referred to, Gough v. Wood, [1894] 1 Q. B. 721.

colegeave against bias santos. Thursday, June 12th, 1823. The owner of a freehold house, in which there were various fixtures, sold it by auction. Nothing was said about the fixtures. A conveyance of the house was executed, and possession given to the purchaser, the fixtures still remaining in the house: Held, that they passed by the conveyance of the freehold; and that even if they did not, the vendor, after giving up the possession, could not maintain trover for them. A few articles, which were not fixtures, were also left in the house; the demand described them together with the other articles, as fixtures, and the refusal was of the fixtures demanded : Held, that upon this evidence the plaintiff could not recover them in this action. [S. C. 3 D. & E. 255; L. J. K. B. 0. S. 239. Referred to, Gough v. Wood, [1894] 1 Q. B. 721.] Trover for stoves, grates, kitchen-ranges, closets, shelves, brewing-coppers, cooling-coppers, mash-tubs, locks, bolts, blinds, &c. Plea, general issue. At the trial before Abbott C.J. at the Westminster sittings after last Michaelmas term, the following were proved to be facts of the case. The plaintiff being the owner of a freehold house and estate, advertised them for sale, and printed particulars were circulated, which took no notice of the articles enumerated in the declaration, which were then in the house. The defendant became the purchaser, the house and estate were conveyed to him, and possession given, those articles still remaining in the house. The plaintiff afterwards desired that a valuation of them should be made, and that defendant should pay for them according to it; the latter contended that they passed to him, together with the free-[77]-hold, and refused to pay for them or deliver them up. The plaintiff demanded all the articles as fixtures; and in his particulars delivered under a Judge's order, described them as fixtures ; and the refusal was of " the fixtures demanded." The Lord Chief Justice thought that some of the articles clearly 312 COLEGRAVE V. BIAS SANTOS 2B.&C.78. passed by the conveyance of the freehold; but that others of them, viz. the stoves, cooling-coppers, mash-tubs, water-tubs, and blinds, were removeable as between landlord and tenant, and that the plaintiff might recover for them. The value of those...

To continue reading

Request your trial
20 cases
  • Greene v Cole
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 1 January 1845
    ...cannot recover their- value in trover, which lies only for goods and chattels. 9 East, 215, Horn v. Baker. 2 B. & A. 165, Davis v. Jones. 2 B. & C. 76, Oolegrave v. Dias Santos, in which last case Abbott C.J. cites the words of Gibbs C.J. in 7 Taunt. 188, Lee v. Risdon. 2 March. 495, S.C. "......
  • Ex parte Barclay and Others Samuel Gawan, a Bankrupt
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 23 November 1855
    ...open to question. He then referred to the following cases decided at common law; Horn v. Baker (9 East, 215), Colegraoe v. Ditts Santos (2 B. & C. 76), Lyde v. Russell (1 B. & Ad. 394), Clark v. Cravmshaw (3 B. & Ad. 804), Coombs v. Beaumont (5 B. & Ad. 72), Hare v. Horton (5 B. & Ad. 715),......
  • Leader v Homewood
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Common Pleas
    • 2 November 1858
    ...v. Warde, Ambler, 113; Lee v. Risdon, 1 Taunt. 188 ; Hitckland v. Butiarjield, 2 B. & B. 54, 4 J. B. Moore, 440 ; Uokgrave v. Diax Santos, 2 B. & C. 76, 3 D. & R. 256 ; Lyde v. Russell, 1 B. & Ad. 394; Weeton v. Woodcock, 7 M. & W. 14; Boffey v. Henderson, 17 Q. B. 574; and the principal ca......
  • Stansfeld and Others, Assignees of the Estate and Effects of Thomas White, the Younger, a Bankrupt, v The Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of the Borough of Portsmouth
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Common Pleas
    • 9 February 1858
    ...to. sever [129] them, he cannot afterwards do it." And that doctrine received the assent of Abbott, C. J., in Colegrave v. Bias Santos, 2 B. & C. 76, 3D. & R. 255. The observations-of Bayley, J., in Storer v. Hunter, 3 B. & C. 368, .5 D. & E. 240, also strongly corroborate this view: and th......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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