Powis v Corbet
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 06 August 1747 |
| Date | 06 August 1747 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 26 E.R. 1120
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Case 202.-forward versus duffield, August 1, 1747. The plaintiff in a charter-party is right in suing on the whole penalty, though only a part of it remained due, but on offering to pay principal, interest and costs, the defendant at law may be relieved in this court. If an obligee will put in a bad answer, and insist on more than is really due, he shall lose his costs here though intitled to them at law. Lord Chancellor. Where A. has several demands against B., and B. pays money generally to A. he may apply it to the payment of such debt as he thinks proper, for the rule is solvendum ad modum recipients. The defendant brought an action against the plaintiff upon the whole penalty of a charter-party, where part of the money was due only, and had judgment on the whole penalty, the defendant at law comes into equity to be relieved upon paying the principal and interest. The plaintiff at law is right in suing upon the whole penalty, though only part of the debt remained due ; and so it is in the case of a common bond ; an obligee, though only part is unpaid, may bring an action on the whole penalty : but then the obligor 1120 POWIS V. CORBET 3ATK. 556, is as right in bringing a bill to be relieved on paying the principal, interest and costs ; and if the obligee will put in a bad answer, and insist on more than is really due, he shall lose his costs here, though intitled to his costs at law. Lord...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
West v Lawday
...App. WEST and LAWDAY. Dunne v. Lewis 2 Br. C. C. 362. Galton v. HancockENR 2 Atk. 424. Powis v. CorbetENR 3 Atk. 556. Manning v. Spooner 3 Ves. 114. Harmood v. Oglander 8 Ves. 105. Milne v. Slator 8 Ves. 295. Mirehouse v. Scaife 2 M. & Cr. 695. Emuss v. SmithENR 2 De G. & Sm. 722. Eddels v.......
-
Alfred Eyles Davies, Ambrose Eyles, and Jane Parry Eyles, - Appellants; Elijah Bush, Thomas Seargeant, and Charles Mortimer, - Respondents
...to the discharge of the incumbrance before the estate descended. And see Donne v. Lewis, 2 B. C. C. 257 ; Manning v. Spooner, 3 Ves. 114 ; 3 Atk. 556; Davis v. Topp, 1 B. C. C. 524. These doctrines and principles do not apply where the devisor did not contract or has not adopted the debt. T......
-
West v Lawday
...v. ConronENR 7 H. L. C. 190. Spong v. Spong 1 Dow. & Cl. 365; 3 Bl. N. S. 84. Cornwall v. CornwallENR 12 Sim. 298. Powis v. CorbetENR 3 Atk. 556; 3 Ves. 116, n. Harmood v. Oglander 3 Ves. 124. Emuss v. SmithENR 2 De G. & Sm. 734. Edwards v. Pugh 2 Jarm. on Wills. 2nd Ed. 127, n. Edells v. J......
-
Howse v Chapman
...all other ifunds. As to real estate, it is clear, if a testator selects part of his property for this purpose, as in Powis v. Corbet (3 Atk. 556. See that case stated from!the Register's Book, 3 Ves. 116, n.) and Donne v. Lewis (2 Bro. C. C. 257), and leaves an estate to descend, he has dec......