Freeman, on the demise of Vernon alias Bund, v West
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1799 |
| Date | 01 January 1799 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 95 E.R. 745
IN THE KING'S COURTS AT WESTMINSTER, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
trinity term, 3 geo. III. 1763. freeman, on the demise of vernon alias bund, versus west. C. B. A lease for lives to begin from the day of the date thereof, and seisin delivered afterwards is good, and shall not be said to convey a freehold to commence in futuro. Ejectment of a toft and certain lands in Charlton in the parish of Cropthorne in the county of Worcester, tried at the last Summer Assizes before Mr. Baron Smythe, when a verdict was found for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the Court upon this case, K. B. XXIV.-24* 746 TRINITY TERM, 3 GEO. III. 1763 2 WILS. K. B. 186. (viz.) it appeared in evidence that the Dean and Chapter of Worcester were seised in right of their church of one of the manors of Charlton in the said parish of Crop-thorne, and being so seised, by indenture bearing date the 26th day of November 1750, between the dean and chapter of the one part, and the plaintiff's lessor of the other part, the dean and chapter for a valuable consideration granted the said manor of Charlton (of which the premises in question are part) to the plaintiff's lessor, to hold to him and his heirs from the day of the date thereof, for the lives of three persons who are still living, under the yearly [166] rents therein reserved; and in the lease power is given by the dean and chapter to William Bund, as their attorney, to take possession of the premises, and to deliver seisin thereof to the plaintiff's lessor, according to the tenor, effect, and true meaning of the said lease; in pursuance of which power, seisin was delivered of the premises by the said William Bund to the plaintiff's lessor on the 28th day of May 1751. It was objected on behalf of the defendant, that this is a lease of a freehold ; and being made to commence in futuro, is therefore void. The question for the opinion of the Court is, whether this lease, as it is made to commence from the day of the date thereof, arid seisin being afterwards delivered on the 28th day of May following, is good or noil This case was twice argued at the Bar, in Easter term last by Serjeant Nares for the defendant, and Serjeant Hewitt for the plaintiff; and in this present term, by Serjeant Aspinal for the defendant, and Serjeant Burland for the plaintiff. After time taken to consider, the Lord Chief Justice delivered the opinion of the whole...
To continue reading
Request your trial