Rawlings v Morgan
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 02 May 1865 |
| Date | 02 May 1865 |
| Court | Court of Common Pleas |
English Reports Citation: 144 E.R. 650
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND IN THE EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 34 L. J. C. P. 185; 12 L. T. 348; 11 Jur. N. S. 564; 13 W. R. 746. Referred to, Lidgett v. Secretan, 1871, L. R. 6 C. P. 626; Morgan v. Hardy, 1886-88, 17 Q. B. D. 780; 18 Q. B. D. 646; 13 App. Cas. 351; Joyner v. Weeks, [1891] 2 Q. B. 34.
eawunus / . morgan. May 2nd, 1865. [S. C. 34 L. J. C. P. 185 ; 12 L. T. 348 ; 11 Jur. N. S. 564 ; 13 W. K. 746. Referred to, Lidgett v. Secretan, 1871, L. fi. 6 C. P. 626; Morgan v. Hardy, 1886-88, 17 Q. B. D. 780; 18 Q. B. D. 646; 13 App. Gas. 351; Joyner v. Weeks, [1891] 2 Q. B. 34.] The defendant held premises under a lease, with a covenant to keep and yield them up in repair. At the expiration of the lease, at Christmas, 1863, the premises were dilapidated to an amount fixed by the jury at 221. The plaintiff (the rever-sioner) had before this time made a verbal agreement with a third person to grant him a lease for a long term, and he at once proceeded to pull down the premises : -Held, that the plaintiff was notwithstanding entitled to recover substantial damages. This was an action brought to recover damages for breach of covenants in a lease, to repair and to yield up in repair a messuage and premises No. 24 Savage Gardens, in the city of London, together with certain fixtures therein. At the trial before Willes, J., at the sittings in London after last Michaelmas Term, the following facts were agreed to by the respective counsel:- The lease was for twenty-one years from the 25th of December, 1842, and expired 611 the 25tll of December, 1863 : the rent payable thereunder was 1791. per annum. At the making of this lease, the premises were about a century old. The plaintiff' is interested in one fifth of the reversion ; and the defendant hecamo 18C.B.(N. S.JTTT. BAWL1NGS V. MORGAN 651 assignee of the term in 1847, and continued iu possession of the premises up to the end of the term. The defendant gave up possession at the end of the lease. For a considerable period before and at the expiration of the lease the premises were out of repair. The [777] amount required to put them into repair conformably with the covenant, was estimated at and was to be taken to be 1301. By letter dated the 1st of June, 186:i, addressed to their solicitor, the defendant made an offer to the reversioners for a new lease. This letter was as follows :- " 15 London Street, Feiichurch Street, "June 1st, 1863. " '24 Savage Gardens. "Dear Sir,-\Ve are instructed by our clients, Messrs. Morgan, Brothers, the tenants of the above premises, to make the following proposal to you, viz. They will be willing, on the expiration of their present tenancy, on the 25th of December next, to repair the premises pursuant to the covenant in the present lease, and to take a, fresh lease of the premises as they now enjoy them, for twenty-one years from the 'JGth of December next, at a rental of 2501. per annum. The fresh lease to contain the same covenants as the existing one. But, if this proposal is entertained, it must be carried out at once, or our clients must be driven to seek other premises, in consequence of the nature of their business. " wjuuht & bonner," This offer was not accepted. Before the expiration of the lease, Messrs. Myers, the builders, of Lambeth, became the owners of one fifth of the said reversion. Some time before the expiration of the lease, it was agreed between Messrs. Myers and the reversioners (the plaintiff being one of them) that the premises should be pulled down, and a new lease of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Bowen Investments Pty Ltd v Tabcorp Holdings Ltd
-
Gilligan v Silke
...I. R. 499. (11) [1952] 1 All E. R. 463. (12) [1940] I. R. 283. (13) [1934] Ch. 298. (14) [1950] 2 K. B. 237. (1) [1943] I. R. 380. (1) 18 C. B. N. S. 776. (2) [1891] 2 Q. B. 31. (3) 1 T. L. R. 484. (4) 2 H. & N. 570. (5) 2 Man. & G. 39. (6) 35 W. R. 588. (1) [1943] I. R. 380. (2) [1934] Ch.......
-
Metge v Kavanagh
...v. The Guardians of the East London UnionELR L. R. 8 C. P. 79. Thelwell v. YelvertonUNK 14 Ir. C. L. R. 188. Rawlings v. MorganENR 18 C. B. N. S. 776. Vivian v. ChampionENRENR 1 Salk. 141; 2 Ld. Raym. 1125. Nixon v. DenhamINTL 1 I. L. R. 100; 1 Jebb & Sy. 416. Turner v. LambENR 14 M. & W. 4......
-
Ellis v Dublin Corporation [Supreme Court.]
...(2) [1900] 1 Ch. 624. (3) [1891] 2 Q. B. 31. (4) 2 H. & N. 570. (5) I. R. 11 C. L. 431 (6) 17 Q. B. D. 770. (7) 2 Ld. Raym. 1125. (8) 18 C. B. (N. S.) 776. (1) 3 Ex. (2) 16 Q. B. D. 613. (3) [1936] 3 All E. R. 91. (4) L. R. 5 Q. B. D. 404. (1) [1913] 1 Ch. 98. (1) Sau. & Sc. 178. (2) [1892]......