Kingsmill v Millard
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 20 June 1855 |
| Date | 20 June 1855 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 156 E.R. 849
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 3 C. L. R. 1022. Referred to, Lasburne v. Davies, 1866, L. R. 1 C. P. 268.
[313] trinity vacation, 19 vigt. kingsmill v. millard. June 20, 1855 -Where a tenant incloses land, whether adjacent to, or distant from, the demised premises, and whether the land be part of a waste, or belong to the landlord or a third person, it is a presumption of fact, that the inclosure is part of the holding, unless the tenant, during the term, does some act disclaiming his landlord's title.-Certain premises were demised by the description of "all that cottage or tenement, with the garden thereto adjoining and belonging, situate &c.; and also a piece or parcel of laud lying near to the said cottage or tenement, containing by estimation three quarters ot an acre (more or less), lately used as garden ground :"-Held, that, under such description, an adjoining piece of waste land would not pass, unless it had been theretofore used as an outlet of the garden. [S. C. 3 C. L. K. 1022. Referred to, Ltsbume v. Davies, 1866, L R. 1 C. P. 268.] Ejectment to recover possession of two cottages and two gardens situate at Cutler's-green, in the parish of Chewton Mendip, in the county of Somerset. The defendant appeared to the writ and defended as landlord. At the trial, before Crowder, J , at the last Somerset Assizes, the following facts appeared.-By indenture of the 24th October, 1799, between Robert Kingsrnill of 850 KING8MILL V. MILLARD 11 EX. 3li the oae part, and William Sheppard of the other part, R. Kmgsmill, in consideration of 40i, demised to W. Sheppard "all that cottage or tenement, formerly two cottages, with the gardens thereto adjoining and belonging, situate and being at a place heretofore Galled Farmer's Cross, and now known by the name of Cutlei's-green, in the parish of Chewton Mendip, in the county of Somerset. and also a piece or paicel of land lying near to the said cottage or tenement, containing by estimation three quarters of an acre (more or less), lately used as garden ground, and some time since in the tenure and occupation of Robert Bull, as tenant thereof " Habendum for three lives, at the yearly rent of 51. In the year 1806, Sheppard assigned the above lease to one Bobbins. At that time there was a fence along the garden on the side of it adjoining a public highway ; but [314] between the fence and the highway theie was a strip of waste land, which the plaintiff now sought to recover About forty years ago, Bobbins inclosed this piece of waste land and occupied it together with the demised premises. At that time there was a shed upon it. In the year 1816, Robbins assigned the original lease to one Curtis, and Robbins continued to occupy the piece of waste land which be had inclosed. In the year 1822, Robbins, by lease and release, conveyed as freehold the waste land to Curtis, who pulled down the shed and built two cottages upon it. In 1848 the plaintiff advertised for sale some of the property at Chewton Mendip, including the two cottages in question, but they were not sold, in consequence of Ctatis having attended and opposed the sale. The defendant, who claimed under the will of Curtis, had received rent for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Long v Tower Hamlets London Borough Council
-
Tower Hamlets London Borough Council v Barrett
...doctrine that a tenant acquires possessory title for his landlord 26 The doctrine was clearly stated by Parke B in Kingsmill v Millard (1855) 11 Exch 313, at 318, in the following terms: "It is laid down in all the cases – whether the inclosed land is part of the waste, or belongs to the la......
-
Bain v Econo Car Rentals Ltd
...given up to the landlord together with the demised premises.” 113 It is this presumption, famously established in Kingsmill v. Millard (1855) 11 Exch. 313 (and affirmed in later cases such as Smirk v. Lyndale Developments Ltd. [1975] Ch. 317) upon which the plaintiff relies to assert posses......
- Batt and another v Adams