Panton, Widow, v Jones

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date08 April 1813
Date08 April 1813
CourtHigh Court

English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1415



Thursday, April 8, 1813. panton, widow, v. jones. (If the occupier of a house submits to a distress for rent stated in the notice of distress to be due from him as tenant to the distramer, this is an acknowledgment of the tenancy ) This was an action for the use and occupation of a house at Bristol. The defendant had never paid rent personally to the plaintiff, and she did not give strict evidence of title ; but it was proved, that in January, 1811, the defendant being in possession of the premises, she distrained on his goods for 39, 18s. stated to be airears of rent then due from him to her as his landlady He did not replevy, and the goods were sold to satisfy the rent. Ludlow, for the defendant, contended, that the distress was no acknowledgment (A a tenancy by the party submitting to it Although he knew the plaintiff had no right [373] to distrain, he might not be in a situation to replevy his goods ; or he might think it preferable to bring an...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Chee Seng & Company Sdn Bhd; Seng Huat Hang Sdn Bhd and Others
    • Malaysia
    • High Court (Malaysia)
    • 1 January 1987
  • Trent v Hunt
    • United Kingdom
    • Exchequer
    • 6 July 1853
    ...he would have been estopped from afterwards disputing the mortgagor's claim: Cooper v. Blandy (1 Bing. N. C. 45), Panton v. Jones (3 Camp. 372) Secondly. A mortgagor in possession has no implied authority to distrain in the name of the mortgagee. The case of a receiver in Chancery affords n......
  • Doe on the several demises of Henry Chawner, Henry William Beavan, and Hugh Phillips Beavan, against Henry Boulter
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of the King's Bench
    • 1 May 1837
    ...J. there, shew that under such circumstances the tenant cannot defeat the landlord's title. The language of Bayley J. in Panton v. Jones (3 Campb. 372), is to the same effect. And the defendant, who could not have set up the lease against Chawner, cannot, a fortiori, do so against Hugh. It ......
  • Crawford v Gillmor
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 21 December 1891
    ...Kennedy v. Phelan Ibid. 320 n. Rankin v. Mc MurtryUNK 24 L. R. Ir. 290. Doe d. Rutledge v. JenningsUNK 3 Ir. L. R. 268. Panton v. JonesENR 3 Camp. 372. Keene v. M'BlaineUNK 17 Ir. C. L. R. 654. Billing v. ArnoldUNK Ir. R. 7 C. L. 529. Campion v. CampionUNK Ir. R. 8 C. L. 313. Barnes v. Barn......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT