Hibbert v Cooke
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 January 1824 |
| Date | 27 January 1824 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 57 E.R. 218
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See In re De Teirner's Settled Estates [1893], 1 Ch. 153; In re Montagu [1897], 1 Ch. 691 [1897], 2 Ch. 8.
Tenant for life.
[552] hibbert v. cooke. Jan. 27, 1824. [See In re De Teirner's Settled Estates [1893], 1 Ch. 153 ; In re Montagu [1897], 1 Ch. 691 [1897], 2 Ch. 8.] Tenant for life. Tenant for life of real estates under a will having expended money in finishing a mansion-house which the testator had begun, but left unfinished, and also in repairing the mansion-house which had been damaged by dry rot, the Court, in a suit for administering the trusts of the will, directed an inquiry whether it was for the benefit of all parties interested that the mansion-house should be finished, but refused an inquiry as to the repairs ; and said if it was found for the benefit of all parties interested that the mansion-house should have been finished, and there was no personal estate applicable, the expense should be a charge on the real estates. This was a bill to administer the trusts of the will of J. Cooke. Sarah Cooke the widow of the testator was one of the Defendants. She was devisee for life of his real estates and of his residuary personal estate, with remainder to his son for life ; with remainder to the son's children, absolutely, as tenants in common. The will directed the leasehold estates of the testator to be sold. It appeared, by the answer of the widow, that at the time of the testator's death he was engaged in building a new mansion-house which was then nearly finished, 1SIM. *8T. 3, NAYLOK V. WINCH 219 and that she had proceeded to complete it; and that she had afterwards expended a considerable sum in repairing it, in consequence of its being damaged by the dry rot. Her answer likewise stated that the leasehold estates of the testator had been underlet by him at small ground rents, on leases which had but a few years to run at the time of his death and were for much shorter terms than his lease ; that it would have been for her benefit, as tenant for life, had the leaseholds been sold immediately after the death of the testator; but that, with a view to the benefit of her son and his children, she, as an executrix under the will, had concurred in delaying the sale till the under-leases had expired, although by this delay her own income as tenant for life had been diminished. She therefore claimed to be entitled to compensation, out of the general residuary...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ferguson v Ferguson
...Williams V. watersENR 14 M. & W. 166. Astley v. Micklethwait 15 Ch. Div. 59. Gilliland v. Crawford Ir. R. 4 Eq. 35. Hibbert v. CookeENR 1 Sim. & St. 552. Dent v. DentENR 30 Beav. 363. Jese v. Lloyd 48 L. T. Rep. 656. Dunne v. DunneENRENR 3 Sm. & G. 22; on appeal, 7 De G. M. & G. 207. Caldec......
- Hillier v Hillier & Latham
-
Gilliland v Crawford
...C. Court. GILLILAND and CRAWFORD. Hibbert v. CookeENR 1 S. & S. 552. Dent v. Dent 30 Bea. 363. The York Buildings Company v. MackenzieENR 8 Bro. P. C. 42. Nairn v. Majoribanks 3 Rus. 582. Caldecott v. BrownENR 2 Hare, 144. Dunne v. Dunne 7 De. G. M. & G. 207. Bostock v. Blakeney 2 Bro.C. C.......
-
Horlock v Smith
...itself, if ap-[574]-plied to, would have sanctioned. If any doubt exists, an inquiry may be directed, as was done in Hibbert v. Uooke (1 Sim. & Stu. 552), whether it was for the benefit of the parties interested that the buildings should be erected. But here, the outlay was made with the kn......