Ramsden v Hylton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 17 June 1751 |
| Date | 17 June 1751 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 28 E.R. 196
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
ramsden v. hylton, June 17, 1751. hylton v. biscoe, & e con. General release from a sister to a brother not binding as to particular rights under the marriage settlement, or articles of the parents, the sister being ignorant of them, and the .brother having covenanted that he was seised in fee, contrary to the fact. (See Bingham v. Bingham, 1 Ves. sen. 126, and Supplement, p. 79.) Satisfaction. The sister held entitled to her claims under the settlement or articles, and also to the consideration recited and expressed in the deed of release ; the brother being a debtor to her to such amount on the face of it. A general release with a particular consideration recited, will be construed according to the particular recital. (See also in Cole v. Gibson, 1 Ves. sen.. 507.) Settlement after marriage, if a portion paid, is on good consideration, and equal to one made before marriage. (Vide in Ward v. Shallet, 2 Ves. sen. 18.)-[Supplement, 350.] Henry Hylton, appearing to have been an incumbered, or rather a weak man, intended in 1688 to divest himself of his estate, and make a settlement of it on his son John, reserving provisions to himself, his wife, and daughters. [305] They reduced 2 VBS. SEN. 306. RAMSDEtf V. HYLTON 197 this into execution in 1688 ; by which the estate of the family was conveyed on trust to raise several sums, with a proviso that as soon as John should marry, or pay his sisters those sums, the trustees should convey the estate to John and his heirs. There were still some disputes in the family ; hut in 1693 John married the daughter of Sir Richard Musgrave, and in 1694 made a settlement of his estate on this recital: that whereas he had intermarried as aforesaid, and whereas Sir Richard Musgrave and Dorothy Madison, his wife's grand-mother, in consideration of the said marriage, and the covenants, grants, and agreements aftermentioned, had paid, agreed, and secured to pay, to John £2000, for and upon the marriage-portion of his said wife, John covenants to convey this estate by fines or recoveries to certain uses ; and covenants, that till the fines were levied he and his heirs should stand seised to those uses. The uses were to himself for life; remainder as to part to his wife in part of her jointure ; remainder to the first, &c., son of the marriage in tail-male ; and afterward remainder to trustees for ninety-nine years in default of issue-male, on trust that if there was no issue-male, and two or more daughters of the marriage, to raise £8000, for their portions to be paid at twenty-one or marriage. He died in 1707, leaving by this marriage six children, two sons Richard and John, and four daughters, all then very young, His widow died in 1709. Richard came first into possession of the estate, and acted as owner of it, making mortgages, &c. Upon his death his brother John came into possession, and acted in same manner. It did not appear that this settlement or article was discovered or known in the family till after death of John the son, when it was found among the papers left by the grandmother of these four ladies in the hands of her representatives. But after these sisters came of age, there were transactions between them and their brother John. Mrs. Biscoe, one of the four, coming of age in 1727, an indenture was in 1728 entered into between her and her said brother ; which recited, that he was indebted to his sister in a bond of £2000 to secure payment of £1000 with interest; and made a mortgage of part of the settled estate by way of security for payment of it, with a covenant that he was seised in fee : then came a clause, that in consideration of that she releases to John, his heirs, executors, and administrators, all actions, causes of action, sums, portions, legacies, claims and demands for and by reason of the will of their mother, or of John's having taken administration to his brother Richard, or for his brother's or father's personal estate, or by [306] leases for lives or years of the collieries of his father, or for and by reason of any other matter and thing except the recited bond in this release. John Hylton died without issue-male. Three bills were now brought. The first by creditors, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ko Teck Siang v Low Fong Mei and another and other actions
...Nautamix BV v Jenkins of Retford Ltd [1975] FSR 385 (distd) Payler v Homersham (1815) 4 M & S 423; 105 ER 890 (folld) Ramsden v Hylton (1751) 2 Ves Sen 304; 28 ER 196 (folld) Rose v Gossman (1967) 111 SJ 17 (refd) Salkeld v Vernon (1758) 1 Eden 64; 28 ER 608 (refd) Turner v Turner (1880) 14......
-
Joy Douglas and Others v Barclays Bank Plc and Another
...the parties based on the information that was available at the time. Reference was made to Cole v. Gibson (1750) 1 Ves Sen 503 at 507, Ramsden v. Hylton (1751) 2 Ves Sen 304 at 311, Salkeld v. Vernon 1 Eden 64 at 67-68 and Lindo v. Lindo (1839) 1 Beav 496 at 505-506. 53 Where the defence of......
-
Bank of Credit and Commerce International SA ((in Liquidation)) v Ali (No. 1)
...applied to that particular case, doing it with his eyes open, and knowing the circumstances." Lord Hardwicke returned to the question in Ramsden v Hylton (1751) 2 VesSen. 304, 28 ER 196 (at 310, 200): "The strongest and most material objection is the release; but I am of opinion, it would n......
- Ko Teck Siang and Others and other applications; Low Fong Mei and Another