Doe d Baker and Others v Jones
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 22 May 1850 |
| Date | 22 May 1850 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 155 E.R. 218
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 19 L J Ex 405 at Nisi Prius, 2 C & K 743
218 DOE r JON PS BEX 169 doe d baker and otkekn -a jones May 22, 1850-The receipt of rent is, no waiver of a continuing bieach of covenant Thetefoie, whete a lessee was bound, under penalty of foifeituie, to repair within a leasonable tune, and aftei bieach the lessor accepted rent -Held, that the reasonable time for reparation did not commence afresh after such acceptance of rent [S 0 19 L J Ex 405 at Nisi Pi ma, 2 C & K 743 ] This was an action of ejectment to recover the possession of certain premises, situate in ([/hapel-stieet, Eclgevvare-road, on a forfeiture by bieach of covenant in not repairing The cause came on foi trial befoie Pollock, C B , at the Middlesex Sittings after Michaelmas Term, 1848 , when a verdict was taken by consent for the lessors of the plaintiff, subject to the award of an atbitiatoi, to whom the cause, and all matters in difference between the said parties, and one B, Darch, who agreed to become a pai tv to tjhe submission, were lefeited The arbitrator awatded (intei alia) as follows -"I find that, by a building lease, being an indenture dated the 1st of July, 1803, and made between J Buck, of the first part, J Stephens and I) Bullock, of the second part, J Ward, of the third part, J Walton, of the fouith pait, and E Welch, of the nftk part, the said parties of the fiist, second, third, and fouith paits, did demise to the said E Welch the laud sought to be reooveted 111 this action, foi 99 yeats, from Christmas, 17U2, at the rent therein mentioned, and if the lessees should at any tune use the premises, ot any pait thereof, for any manufactory save as a floorcloth manufactory as therr used, or for any tiade [499] or business whatsoever, without the licence in writing under the hands of the lessors, then yielding and paying, for the residue then to come of the said term, over and above the rent thereinbefore reserved, the monthly rent of 501 The lease contained a covenant by the lessee, for himself and his assigns, that he and his assigns would, at then own cost and chai gea, well and sufficiently repair, uphold, support, sustain, maintain, tile, slate, lead, paint, pave, purge, scour, cleanse, empty, amend, and keep the same piemises, and every part thereof, with all and all mannei of needful and necessary repatations and amendments whatsoever, when and so often as need 01 occasion should requne, during all the said term, and a proviso, that in case of bieach or non-performance or non-obseivatrce of any of the covenants, clauses, or agreements in the lease, the lessors might errter and put an errd to the term I hnd that the reversion in fee, expectant on the teimination of the said term, became vested in the lessors of the plamtrfi pnot to September, 1846, and has so continued vested to the present time In that mouth one 11 Darch, who pioposed to become tenant of the premises, went over them with E Gantwell, a BLitteyor, on behalf of the lessors of the plaintiff, and pointed out to him certain alterations he wished to make therein, which consisted in moving...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cayman Arms (1982) Ltd v English Shoppe Ltd
...Panton for the defendant. Cases cited: (1) Ambler v. WoodbridgeENR(1829), 9 B. & C. 376; 109 E.R. 140, applied. (2) Baker v. JonesENR(1850), 5 Ex. 499; 155 E.R. 218, applied. (3) Bank of Nova Scotia v. Hellenic Mutual War Risks Assn. (Bermuda) Ltd., [1990] 1 Q.B. 818; [1989] 3 All E.R. 628,......
-
Banning v Wright
...on a subsequent breach of the same term—received statutory recognition in 23 and 24 Vict. c. 38, s. 6. See also Doe d. Baker v. Jones (1850) 5 Ex. 498. In these cases the term in the lease remained exactly the same after what was held to be the first waiver-otherwise it could not have been ......