Michael Webber, - Appellant; Richard Farmer, - Respondent
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 January 1718 |
| Date | 21 January 1718 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 2 E.R. 116
House of Lords
Mew's Dig. vii. 705; xiv. 1747.
A. made an absolute conveyance of lands to B. and his heirs, in consideration of £1500 which, was at that time the full value; but on the next day B. executed a defeazance, declaring, that if A. or his heirs, should within 16 years pay B. the £1500 the conveyance should be void. B. entered and enjoyed the lands; and about three years afterwards made a settlement thereof upon his marriage; and to which settlement A. was privy, but took no notice of the defeazance, or ever attempted to refute the general opinion that B. was the sole and absolute owner of the lands. After B.'s death, A. set up by the defeazance, and filed a bill to redeem; to which the son and heir of B. pleaded the purchase deeds and marriage settlement of his father. Held, that the intent of the conveyance being to enable B. to obtain a marriage, and a considerable portion, such intention was fraudulent; and therefore a perpetual injunction was awarded against A. to stop all further proceedings under the defeazance.
IVBBOWN. WEBBER V. FARMER [1718] case 8.-michael webber,-Appellant; eichaed farmek,-Respondent [21st January 1*718]. [Mew's Dig. vii. 705; xiv. 1747.] [A. made an absolute conveyance of lands to B. and his heirs, in consideration of £1500 which, was at that time the full value; but on the next day B. executed a defeazance, declaring, that if A. or his heirs, should within 16 years pay B. the £1500 the conveyance should be void. B. entered and enjoyed the lands; and about three years afterwards made a settlement thereof upon his marriage; and to which settlement A. was privy, but took no notice of the defeazance, or ever attempted to refute the general opinion that B. was the sole and absolute owner of the lands. After B.'s death, A. set up by the defeazance, and filed a bill to redeem; to which the son and * heir of B. pleaded the purchase deeds and marriage settlement of his father. Held, that the intent of the conveyance being to enable B. to obtain a marriage, and a considerable portion, such intention was fraudulent; and therefore a perpetual injunction was awarded against A. to stop all further proceedings under the defeazance.] ** decree of the Court of Chancery in Ireland, for a perpetual injunction, affirmed : eight Lords against seven. Cowper and Harcourt against the decree; Parker for it. 13 Vin. 525. H. c. 3. From the statement in 13 Vin.: 2 Eq. Ca. Ab. and Treatise of Equity, the point determined seems more accurately as follows: " If A. make an absolute conveyance to B. for £1500 and B. executes a defeazance upon payment of the £1500 within 16 years; and B. on his mar-[171]-riage settles this as an absolute estate on his wife, and the issue of that marriage; there...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fraud, - Circumvention, - Covin
...and says, there is added a Note in the MS. that the Wife's Father had Notice of the Defeasance before the Settlement made. Ibid. [S. C. 4 Bro. P. C. 170.] 16. A. agreed for the Purchase of Timber, and A. and B. both enter into a Bond that A. his Executors and Administrators, should not cut ......
-
Murphy v Taylor
...Hearn 7 Ves. 211. Barrell v. SabineENR 1 Vern. 268. Walker v. WalkerENR 2 Atk. 99. Buxton v. ListerENR 3 Atk. 383. Webber v. FarmerENR 4 Bro. P. C. 170. Langton v. HortonENR 5 Beav. 9. Goodman v. Grierson 2 B. & Bea. 279. Copplestone v. Foxwell Freem. 150. Verner v. Winstanley 2 Sch. & L. 3......