Hawkes v The Eastern Counties Railway Company
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 13 March 1850 |
| Date | 13 March 1850 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 64 E.R. 686
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. affirmed, 1 De G. M. & G. 737; 42 E. R. 739 (with note); 5 H. L. C. 331; 10 E. R. 928 (with note).
[743] hawkes v. the eastern counties railway company. March 13, 1850; March 14, 1851. [S. C. affirmed, 1 De G. M. & G. 737; 42 E. E. 739 (with note); 5 H. L. C. 331; 10 E. E. 928 (with note).] A railway company, contemplating a new branch, and endeavouring to obtain an Act for the purpose, contracted with a tenant for life for the purchase of the fee, and to obtain in their Act necessary powers for this purpose. Under the Act which they obtained it was a question whether they had power to take more than a portion of the land. Held, that they were nevertheless bound specifically to perform the agreement. Queere, whether the same decision would have been given if the company had throughout acted with good faith, and it had been certain that the tenant for life could have obtained adequate compensation at law. By an agreement, bearing date the 27th of May 1847, and made between the Eastern Counties Eailway Company of the one part, and Henry Hawkes of the other part, after reciting that the company were promoting a bill before Parliament to enable them to make a railway from Wisbeach to Spalding; and that the proposed railway was intended to pass near to the residence of the said Henry Hawkes, situate at Spalding, in such a manner as would most seriously damage the same, and render it unfit for habitation ; and after reciting that Henry Hawkes had hitherto opposed the passing of the said bill into a law, but had consented to withdraw his opposition upon the said company entering into the agreement thereinafter contained-it was expressed to be agreed by and between the parties thereto that, in the event of the said bill in its then present or any amended, modified or altered form, for the like objects or any or either of them (and to which -the said Eastern Counties Eailway Company should be parties or promoters), passing into a law, the said Eastern Counties Eailway Company, their successors or assigns, would purchase, and they thereby agreed to purchase, of and from the said Henry Hawkes and his heirs, and he thereby accordingly agreed to sell to the company, their successors or assigns, the capital messuage and hereditaments therein described for the price of 8000, to be paid by the company within eighteen calendar months after the passing of such bill as aforesaid; and, further, that, in addition to such purchase-money or sum of 8000, the said company, their successors and assigns, would, at the same time, pay to the said Henry Hawkes, his executors, administrators and assigns, the sum of [744] 5000 as a compensation for the personal annoyance and inconvenience of compulsory eviction from his said 3DEG.&SM.745. HAWKES V. EASTERN COUNTIES JRLY. CO. 687 residence; and, further, that, inasmuch as Henry Hawkes, under the will of his late father, was only tenant for life of the said capital messuage and of the greater part of the said hereditaments, with remainders over in strict settlement, the company would obtain all such powers and authorities, and do and perform all acts and things, and adopt all such measures, and pursue all such courses, either in or by such bill as aforesaid, or otherwise, as were, was or should be necessary or required for enabling Henry Hawkes and his heirs...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Preston v The Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle-upon-Tyne Junction Railway Company
...is entitled to equitable relief. They also cited 17BBAV.U7. JENINGS V. BA1LY 977 ffawkt'S v. The Eastern Counties Railway Company (3 De G. & Sm. 743 ; 1 De G. M. & G. 737); [117] Sanderson v. Cockermouth, &c., Railway Company (11 Beav. 497); Webb v. Direct London and Portsmouth Railway Comp......
- The Directors, Company, of the Eastern Counties Railway Company, - Appellants; Henry Hawkes, - Respondent
-
Isenberg v The East India House Estate Company Ltd
...receipt of the Respondent's notice of the 23d of February 1863. Such cases as HawTces v. The Eastern Counties Eailway [271] Company (3 De G. & Sm. 743; 1 De G. M. & G. 737 ; 5 H. L. Ca. 331) and Broadbent v. The Imperial Gas Company (7 De G. M. & G. 436 ; 7 H. L. Ca. 600) shew the power and......
-
Between The Shrewsbury and Birmingham Railway Company, Plaintiffs; and the London and North-Western Railway Company, the Shropshire Union Railways and Canal Company, George Carr Glyn, and William Cowan, Defendants; and between The London and North-Western Railway Company and The Shropshire Union Railways and Canal Company, Plaintiffs; and The Shrewsbury and Hirmingham Railway Company, Defendants
...case (7 Eailw. Ca. 227), as decided in the Exchequer Chamber. Some at least of these were cited at the Bar. Of Mr. Hawkes's case (3 De G. & Sm. 743 ; 1 De G. Mac. & G. 737), also-mentioned more than once during the argument, I will only say that I thought Lord St. Leonards right in affirmin......