Harnett and Wife v Maitland
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 20 January 1847 |
| Date | 20 January 1847 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 153 E.R. 1184
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 4 D. & L. 545; 16 L. J. Ex. 134.
harnett and wife v. maitland. Jan. 20, 1847.-A declaration in case stated, ; that the defendant held and occupied a messuage, &c., as tenant thereof to the ' plaintiff, Under a demise thereof made by the plaintiff to the defendant, by reason : of which said tenancy it became and was the duty of the defendant to manage 16 H. & W. 258. HARNETT V. MAITLAND 1185 and use the said tenements in a, tenant-like and proper manner, and not to permit or commit waste thereto ; yet the defendant did not manage and use the said tenements in a tenant-like and proper manner, but on the contrary thereof, i wrongfully and unjustly suffered and permitted them to be waste, ruinous, &c. for want of tenantahle and necessary repairs : - Held bad, on general demurrer, for not shewing that the defendant was more than a tenant at will, who is not liable : to an action for permissive waste.-Hetnble, a tenant for years is liable, under the statute of Gloucester, 6 Edw. 1, c. 5, to an action for permissive waste. [S. C. 4 D. & L. 545; 16 L. J. Ex. 134.] Case. The declaration stated, that whereas the defendant heretofore, to wit, on &c.j held and occupied a certain [258] messuage, dwelling-house, and premises, as tenant thereof to the plaintiffs, under a demise thereof theretofore made by the plaintiffs to the defendant, the reversion thereof belonging to the plaintiffs ; by reason of which said tenancy, it became and was the duty of the defendant, during all the time aforesaid, to manage and use the said tenements in a tenant-like and proper manner, and not to permit or commit waste thereto : yet the defendant did not nor would manage and use the said tenements in a tenant-like and proper manner, but, on the contrary thereof, wrongfully and unjustly suffered and permitted the said messuage, dwelling-house, Ac., to become, be, and remain, and the same still are, wasjte, ruinous, and in great decay, for want of tenantahle and necessary repairs, and for want of being managed in a tenant-like and proper manner. Demurrer to so much of the declaration as charges that the defendant did permit waste, and the grievances therein mentioned which were and are permissive waste. Joinder in demurrer. The point stated for argument by the defendant was, that under the demise as stated in the declaration, the defendant was not by law liable...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Dayani v Bromley London Borough Council
-
Yellowly v Gower and Another
...put on the same footing as tenants for life, both as to voluntary and permissive waste by Lord Coke, 1 Inst. 53, Harnet v. Mainland (16 M. & W. 257), though the degree of repairs required for a tenant from year to year, by modern decisions, is much limited (b) This being so, the covenant by......
-
George White and Albert White v James M'Cann and William M'Cann
...v. SandersENR 5 Scott, 58; S. C. 3 Bing. N. C. 850. Martin v. GilhamENR 7 Ad. & El. 540; S. C. 2 Nev. & P. 568. Harnett v. MaitlandENR 16 M. & W. 257. Agard v. King Cro. Eliz. 775. Turbervil v. StampENR 1 Salk. 13. Anonymous Cro. Eliz. 10. Griffith's case Sir F. Moore, 69. Hicks v. Downing ......
-
De Burgh and Others v Thomson
...Bench DE BURGH and others and THOMSON. Greene v. ColeENR 2 Wms. Saund. 234. Harnett v. MaitlandENR 16 M. & W. 257. 32 COMMON LAW REPORTS. E. T. 1856. Queen's Bench DE BURGH and others v. THOMSON.* April 25. TRH was a demurrer to a defence. The summons and plaint stated that the plaintiffs a......