Keightley v Watson and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 April 1849 |
| Date | 27 April 1849 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 1034
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 18 L J Ex 339
1034 KEIGHTLBY V WATSON 3 EX. 717 keightley v watson and another Apul 27, 1849-Covenant by one planitift, on a deed executed by one A A D of the hist patt, the plaintiff of the second part, and the defendants of the third pait The deed, after leciting that A A D had agreed to purchase certain land of the plaintiff, which same land A A D had agreed to sell to the defendants, stated that it was theioby covenanted by ear-h party thereto, that A A D should sell, and the defendants should purchase, the said land at 73.S51, 9001 to be paid upon the execution of the deed, and ()4J51 on the 27th of November, Isol The deed then contained the following covenant -" And the said It W and H \V (the defendants), foi themselves, their hens, &c, hereby covenant with the said W T K (the plaintiff), his executors, &c , and, as a separate covenant, with the said A A D , his executois, &c, that they the said it W and H W, their heirs, &c , shall, on performance of the covenant and agieeruent hereinbefore contained on the patt of the said A A D , pay to the said W T K , his exeoutois, &c, or to the said A A D, his executots, &c , in case the said W T K , his executors, &o, shall then have been paid his or their put chase-money, payable &c , the sum of 64351, being the remainder of the said purchase-money, on or befoie the 27th of Novembei, 1851 And fuither, that the said Lt W and H W , their hens, &c , shall, in the meantime, and until the whole of the said sum of 64J51 shall be paid oti, pay to the said W T K , his executois, &o , interest on so much of the purchase-money as shall from time to time lemain unpaid, at the rate of 51 pel cent pei annum, from the date of these presents," &c -Held, that VV T K, the plaintiff, might propeily sue alone foi interest on the unpaid poition of the purchase-money, the covenant being seveial [S C 18 L J Ex 339] Covenant upon an indentute of the J7th of Novembei, 1844, made between one A A Dobbs of the farst part, the plaintiff of the second part, and the defendants and one Jerome Smith, since deceased, ot the third part (profert) 'lire decollation, after reciting certain matteis in the deed, and setting out certain covenants hereinafter ex-[717]-pressly stated, and the necessaiy averments of performance, &c , alleged as a breach the non-payment by the defendants to the plaintiff of certain inteiest on a part of the purchase-money of cettam lands, &c , payable by virtue of that instrument The defendants, having waved oyei of the deed, set it out in then plea verbatim The deed, after lecitmg an indenture enteied into by the defendants and plaintiff and Dobbs, whereby the lattei agreed to purchase of the plaintiff certain parcels of land and tenements, and after reciting that Dobbs had agreed with the defendants and Smith to sell them the said several parcels of land and tenements, stated that each of the paities thereto, so far as related to the acts and deeds on lus own part to be performed, did thereby for himself, his heirs, &c, covenant arid agree with the othei of them, that Dobbs should Hell, and the defendants and Smith should purchase, the said parcels of land (describing them) at the sum of 73351, to be paid by the defendants and Smith by the payment of 9001 upon the execution of the deed, and 64351 on the 27th of Novembei, 1851 , and that Dobbs should then, or within a month aftei notice, deliver to the defendants and Smith an abstract of his title, &c The deed then proceeded to state that Dobbs covenanted " that he, and that all othei necessary conveying parties, &c , should, on payment on the J7th of November, 1851, of the said sum of 64^51 , remainder of the said purchase-money as aforesaid, execute a propet conveyance of the said heieclitarnents, itc, unto the defendants and Smith," &c Then followed the covenant upon which the present action was brought -" And the said K Watson, H Watson, and J Smith, for themselves, their hens, executois, pd adimmstiators, hereby covenant with the said W T Keightley, his executois, 4dministratprs, and assigns, and as a separate covenant with the said A A Dobbs, his executois, [718] admnustratois, and assigns, that they the said K Watson, H Watsou,iand J Smith, then heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, shall, on performance of the covenant and agreement heieinbefore contained on the pait of the said A A I)obbs, pay to the said W T Keightley, his executois, administrators, or assigns, 01 to the s.ufl A A Dobbs, his executois, administtatois, 01 assigns, in case 3 EX. 719. KEIGHTLEY V. WATSON 1035 the said \V. T. Keightley, hia executors, administrators, or assigns, shall then have been paid his or their purchase-money, payable by virtue of the said in part recited contract, the sum of ( 4351., being the remainder of the said purchase-money, on or before the 27th day of November...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
White v Tyndall
...2 B. & Ald. 746. The Earl of Shrewsbury v.Gould Ibid. 487, 494. Kendall v. HamiltonELR 4 App. Cas. 504, 545. Keightley v. WatsonENR 3 Exch. 716. Bradburne v. BotfieldENR 14 M. & W. 559. Wilmer v. CurreyENR 2 De G. & Sm. 347. Clarke v. BickersENR 14 Sim. 639. Beer v. BeerENR 12 C. B. 60. Tip......
- Federation Insurance Ltd v Wasson
-
Daniel Byth Haddon against Stephen Hawes Ayers, Edmund Isham Brietzcke, John Bampfylde Daniell, Thomas Charles Simmons, Thomas Smith and Francis Freeman Statham
...what I said in Soribie v. Park'(12 M. & W. 146). When I used the word ' joint,' I meant expressly joint:" and in KeigUley v. Watson, (3 Exch. 716, 722) (a case not directly in point here) he refers to this, and adheres to it. In all these cases the rule is upheld that, if the words be not u......
- Drake v Templeton