Pope v Garland

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date29 June 1841
Date29 June 1841

English Reports Citation: 160 E.R. 1059



S. C. 10 L. J. Ex. Eq. 13, 92. Applied, Spencer v. Walsh, 1847, 10 Ir. Eq. R. 386.

[394] pope v. garland. Feb. 18th, June 29th, 1841.-Upon the sale of leasehold property, it is the duty of the purchaser to inquire into the covenants and stipulations of the original lease. Therefore, where leasehold property about to be sold was described in the particulars of sale as being held at a ground-rent of 86 per annum, and it appeared from the lease that the ground-rent was 80, and one-third of the improved yearly rent or value, and there were other stringent covenants in the lease, not noticed in the particulars, such as that no fine should be taken for an under-lease or assignment, except with the consent of the rever-sioner, &c.: Held, nevertheless^ that the purchaser must be held to his contract. -A tenant at will, at a yearly rent, is a tenant from year to year.-An infringement of the rule, cujus est solum, ejus est usque ad coelum, is sufficient to avoid the contract between vendor and purchaser. [S. C. 10 L. J. Ex. Eq. 13, 92. Applied, Spencer v. Walsh, 1847, 10 Ir. Eq. E. 386.] In pursuance of a decree made in this suit for the sale of certain leasehold estates of a testator of the name of William Law, the property was put up for sale by auction in lots in December, 1839, when Mr. Charles Stevens, a solicitor, attended at the sale and purchased the lot now in question. A motion was afterwards made that the purchaser might be ordered to pay his purchase-money into Court. This motion was opposed on the ground of several alleged objections to the title; the purchaser stating by his affidavit that his object was to add the purchased premises to an adjacent property of which he had the fee, for the purpose of building; but that the restrictions and conditions with which he found the premises in question incumbered prevented his carrying his object into effect. Upon this motion the usual reference as to title was made to the Master; and the Master having reported in favour of the title, the cause was now heard on an exception to the Master's report. 1060 POPE V. GARLAND 4 Y. & C EX. 395 It appeared from the particulars of sale that the lot in question was parcelled out into small dwellings and gardens, which, with the exception of two, were underlet for long terms, at certain ground-rents. These respective premises, with names of the tenants and the respective amounts of the rents, &c., were stated in a list in the | articiilars. The two tenements which, were not underlet on lease, were described Tespectively as " A leasehold brick-built house with a garden, containing two bedchambers, &c., let to Mr C. Potter, as tenant at will, at 20 per annum," ;md "a large piece of garden ground containing about 4J acres, at the back of Park-place, let to Mr. J. Davies, as tenant at will, at the low rent of 20 per annum " At the con-[395]-clusion of the whole statement was a paragraph to the effect that all the above premises were held under an. original lease, for an unexpired term of forty-nine years from Christmas Day, 1839, at a ground rent of 861 14s. 2d , and had been usually let to various tenants at rents amounting in the whole to 1201. 17s. 6d. The original lease under which the whole property was held was made between Charles Shard of the one part, and the testator William Law of the other part, and contained a covenant in the following terms :-" And it is hereby declared and agreed by and between the parties hereto, that for the better ascertaining of the further or additional yearly rent which is from time to time to be paid to the said Chailes Shard, his heirs or assigns, during the said term, beyond the said yearly rent of 80 hereinbefore reserved, and the terms and conditions of every lease or agreement for a lease which shall be granted or entered into by the said William Law, his executors, administrators, or assigns, of or respecting all or any part of the said piece or parcel of ground, and other premises hereby demised, all leases and agreements for leases of all or any part of the said piece or parcel of ground and premises at any time or times hereafter to be granted by the said William Law, his executors, administrators, or assigns, to or with any person or persons whomsoever, together with the counterparts thereof, shall be prepared by the solicitor for the time being of the said Charles Shard, his heirs or assigns, at the costs of the said William Law, his executors, administrators, or assigns, or his or their under-tenants, the said...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Manifold v Johnston
    • Ireland
    • Chancery Division (Ireland)
    • 18 March 1901
    ...D. 131. Kendall v. Hill 6 Jur. (N. S.) 968. Osborne to RowlettELR 13 Ch. D. 774. Patman v. HarlandELR 17 Ch. D. 353. Pope v. GarlandENR 4 Y. & Coll. 394. Re Doherty's Contract 15 L.R. Ir. 247. Smith v. ChaduickELR 20 Ch. D. 27. VoL. I.] CHANCERY DIVISION. 7 The next tenant for life and cert......
  • Vaughan v Magill
    • Ireland
    • Rolls Court (Ireland)
    • 28 April 1848
    ...Ves. 328. Warren v. ThunderUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 371. Smith v. Smith 2 Law Rec. N. S. 157. Wigg v. WiggENR 1 Atk. 381. Pope v. GarlandENR 4 Y. & C. Exch. 394. Spunner v. WalshUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 386. Vignolles v. Bowen Supra, p 194. Taylor v. BlacklowENR 3 Bing. N. C. 235. Ogilvy v. FolgambeEN......

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