George Murless and Betty his Wife, Plaintiffs, and Matthew Franklin and Richard Franklin the Younger, Defendants
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 26 January 1818 |
| Date | 26 January 1818 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 36 E.R. 278
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
george murless and betty his Wife, Plaintiffs, and matthew franklin and richard franklin the Younger, Defendants. Jan. 17, 19, 20, [1818]. A father having purchased in the names of his sons n copyhold estate, which he afterwards demised by licence obtained subsequently to the purchase; the sons take the estate successively, as an advancement. To repel the presumption of advancement, evidence of the father's intention must be contemporaneous with the purchase. Richard Franklin having three sons, Matthew (the eldest), John, and Richard, in 1779 purchased the reversion of a copyhold tenement holden of the manor of North Curry, in the county of Somerset, expectant on the death of Frances Wright ; and, at a court baron on the [14] 7th December 1779, took the reversion of the said tenement, " To hold the same unto the said John Franklin, Matthew Franklin, and Richard Franklin, sons of the said Richard Franklin the elder, for their lives and the life of every and either of them longest living, successively according to the custom of the said manor, immediately after the determination of an estate then subsisting on the said premises, for the life of Frances Wright" ; and Richard Franklin the father, and John, Matthew, and Richard the son, were admitted tenants as in reversion. By the custom of the manor (as alleged in the bill), a tenant may, by licence in writing, entered in the court rolls, demise a tenement holden of the manor, whether in possession or reversion, for a term of ninety-nine years. On the 2d April 1781, a licence was given to Richard Franklin the elder, to demise the tenement in question, for any term of years, determinable oti the deaths of his sons John, Matthew, 1 SWANS. IS. MURLESS 1'. FRANKLIN 279 and Richard ; and by indenture bearing date 5th May 1781, on the marriage of John Franklin and Betty Dare, Richard Franklin the elder demised the said tenement to Robert Ludwell, his executors, administrators, and assigns, for the term of ninety-nine years (to commence from the death of Frances Writ/lit), if John, Matthew, and Richard the sou, or any of them, should so long live ; upon trust to permit the premises to be held and enjoyed by Richard franklin the elder, and after his decease by JoJm Franklin for his life, and after his tlec'.eaHe by Belli/ Darn for her life, and after the death of the survivor of them, itt trust for the children of John Franklin and Betty Dare, in such proportions as John Franklin should appoint, arid in default of appointment equally ; and for default of such issue, in trust...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Calverley v Green
-
Lau Siew Kim v Yeo Guan Chye Terence and Another
...see Pearce & Stevens ([31] supra) at p 253. The presumption was described by Lord Eldon in Murless v Franklin (1818) 1 Swans 13 at 17; 36 ER 278 at 280 as The general rule that on a purchase by one man in the name of another, the nominee is a trustee for the purchaser, is subject to excepti......
-
Re Shephard. Shephard v Cartwright
... ... last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Richard David Shephard, of Marlpits Farm, Ninfield, in ... and registered in the names of himself, his wife and his three children whom I have named: ... was expressly rejected by Lord Eldon in Murless v. Franklin , 1 Sw. 13 at p. 19, and I am not ... ...
-
Low Gim Siah and Others v Low Geok Khim and Another
...2 All ER 236 (distd) Hepworth v Hepworth (1870-71) LR 11 Eq 10 (refd) McGrath v Wallis [1995] 2 FLR 114 (distd) Murless v Franklin (1818) 1 Swans 13; 36 ER 278 (folld) Neo Tai Kim v Foo Stie Wah [1981-1982] SLR (R) 222; [1980-1981] SLR 215, CA (refd) Neo Tai Kim v Foo Stie Wah [1985-1986] S......
-
Resulting Trusts
...v Lattimer (1978), 18 OR (2d) 375 (HCJ). 18 Heseltine v Heseltine, [1971] 1 All ER 952 (CA). 19 Murless v Franklin (1818), 1 Swans 13, 36 ER 278 (Ch). 20 Pettitt v Pettitt , [1970] AC 777 (HL) and Rathwell , above note 5. 21 New Brunswick, Marital Property Act , SNB 2012, c 107, s 15(1); Pr......