Jee, Clerk, against Thurlow
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1824 |
| Date | 01 January 1824 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 107 E.R. 487
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
S. C. 4 D. & R. 11; 2 L. J. K. B. O. S. 81. Referred to, Hindley v. Westmeath, 1827, 6 B. & C. 213. Followed, Baynon v. Batly, 1832, 8 Bing. 258; Wilson v. Mushett, 1832, 3 B. & Ad. 752. Approved, Randle v. Gould, 1857, 8 El. & Bl. 469. Referred to, Fearon v. Aylesford, 1884, 14 Q. B. D. 809; Nicol v. Nicol, 1885-86, 30 Ch. D. 147; 31 Ch. D. 524. Discussed and applied, Sweet v. Sweet, [1895] 1 Q. B. 14.
[547] jee, Clerk, against thurlow. 1824. By deed of three parts, between husband, wife, and trustee, reciting that differences existed, and that the husband and wife had agreed to live separate, the husband covenanted to pay an annuity to the wife, during so much of her life as he should live, and the trustee covenanted to indemnify the husband against the wife's debts, and that she should release all claim of jointure, dower, and thirds: Held, that this deed was legal and binding, and that a plea by the husband, that the wife sued in the Ecclesiastical Court for restitution of conjugal rights, and that he put in an allegation and exhibits, charging her with adultery, and that a decree of divorce a mensa et toro was in that cause pronounced, was not a sufficient answer to an action by the trustee for arrears of the annuity. [S. C. 4 D. & E. 11; 2 L. J. K. B. 0. S. 81. Referred to, Hindleyv. Westmeath, 1827, 6 B. & C. 213. Followed, Baynon v. Bally, 1832, 8 Bing. 258; Wilson v. Mushett, 1832, 3 B. & Ad. 752. Approved, Bundle v. Gould, 1857, 8 El. & Bl. 469. Referred to, Fearon v. Aylesford, 1884, 14 Q. B. D. 809; Nicol v. Nicol, 1885-86, 30 Ch. D. 147 ; 31 Ch. D. 524. Discussed and applied, Sweet v. Sweet, [1895] 1 Q. B. 14.] Debt on an indenture, made between defendant of the first part, his wife of the second part, and plaintiff, a trustee for the wife, of the third part, whereby, (after reciting that certain differences had then lately arisen and taken place between defendant and his wife, and that they had mutually agreed to live separate and apart,) defendant covenanted to pay his wife, during so much of her natural life as he should live, an annuity of 801. a year. Breach, non-payment of one quarter's annuity. Plea first, craved oyer of the deed, whereby it appeared that defendant covenanted not to sue his wife for restitution of conjugal rights, and that she agreed to accept the said annuity for her support, to leave their children under the sole control of defendant, without any interference by her, and that if defendant paid any debts for her, he should be at liberty to deduct the amount out of the annuity. And plaintiff, on behalf of the wife, covenanted that she should release and give up all claim of jointure, dower, or thirds, and that he would indemnify defendant against all her debts. The plea then averred, that after the making of the indenture, the wife instituted, in the Consistory Court of the Lord Bishop of London, a cause against defendant for the restitution of conjugal rights; in which cause defendant caused to be given in, and admitted an allegation and exhibits, charging his wife with certain acts of adultery ; and that [548] such proceedings were thereupon...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
James Randle against Thomas Well Gould and Ellen Gould, his Wife, Executrix of John Lawrence, Deceased
...upon separation deeds, than is desirable, though such deeds themselves must now be allowed not to be necessarily illegal; Jee v. Thurlow (2 B. & C. 547). Such is no doubt the doctrine of Courts of law : these pleas are equitable. [Lord Campbell C.J. Surely on this point there can be no dist......
-
Crouch v Waller
...B. & Ad. 743); Randall v. Gould (8 Ell. & Bl. 457); Wanlv. Audland (16 M. & W. 862); Sear/rave v. Seagrave (13 Ves. 439); Jee v. Thwrlmu (2 B. & C. 547). Mr. Selwyn and Mr. W. D. Lewis, for the Defendant Mr. Crouch. The award and the two deeds were one transaction, and the trusts of the ann......
-
Between Charles Vandergucht, Plaintiff; and The Honourable William De Blaquiere and Lady Harriet his Wife, Robert Montgomerie, and The Honourable Peter Boyle de Blaquiere, Defendants
...Oxenden v. Oxenden (Gilb. Rep. 1 & 2 Vern. 493), Rodney v. Oha/mberii (2 East, 283), Dwant v. Titley (1 Price, 577), Jee v. Thurlow (2 B. & C. 547), Westmeath v. Salisbury (5 Bligh, 339, see 366), Stuart v. Kirkwall (3 Mad. 387), Stones v. Cooke (8 Sim. 321, n.). Nov. 1 6. the lord chancell......
-
The Most Honourable George Thomas John, Marquess of Westmeath, - Appellant; The Most Honourable James William Brownlow Cecil, Marquess of Salisbury; Henry Widman Wood, Esquire; the Honourable and Reverend Gerald Valerian Wellesley; William Sheldon, Esquire; the Most Honourable Emily Anne Bennet Elizabeth, Marchioness of Westmeath; and Lady Rosa Nugent, - Respondents
...as to deeds of separation. Legard v. Johnson, 3 Yes. 352. ; St. John v. St. John, 11 Yes. 526., on the same point. Jee v. Thurlow, 2 B. & C. 547., the case of a deed of separation with a covenant by a trustee to indemnify the husband against the debts of the wife, held valid : Guth v. Guth,......