Re Laws, and the Principal Officers of HM Ordnance
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 November 1847 |
| Date | 25 November 1847 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 188
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 17 L J Ex 126
IN RE LAWS, AND THE PRINCIPAL OFFICERS OF HER MAJESTY'S ORDNANCE Nov 25, 1847 -A person, whose land has been valued by a jury, and sold, undei the piovisions of the National Defence Act (5 & 6 Viet c 94), is not entitled to the expenses and costs which he has necessarily incurred in bringing the matter to trial The woids of the I')th section, "compensation foi the absolute purchase of the land," ate not per se sufficiently compiehensive to include such expenses and costs [S C 17 L ,1 Ex 126] In this case the value of certain land of Mi Laws, situated in the county of Pembroke, had been assessed by a juiy under the provisions of the statute 5 & 6 Viet c 94 At the tnal it was proposed by Sir F Kelly, on the part of the claimant, to give evidence of certain expenses whrch had been incurred in surveying tho land, and in bringing the question before the jury This evidence was objected to by the Attorney-U-erieral on behalf of the down, on the ground that there was no provision in the act which gave these expenses and costs The evidence was rejected Sir F Kelly having obtained a uile calling on the defendants to shew cause why the several proceedings in this matter, and the verdict of the juiy returned into this Courtj should riot be set aside, and why a writ for a new inquiry should not be issued, The Attorney-General and Rowe now shewed cause Ihis question tuins upon the construction to be put upon [442] the National Defence Act, 3 & 6 Viet c 94, and the question is simply this -In addition to the amount found by the juiy as compensation for the land which is the subject of inquity, are they at liberty to give the expenses and costs inclined in proving and obtaining that compensation? It is contended that they are not This act is unlike acts in pan matena In the Lands Clauses Consolidation Act (8 & 9 Viet c 18), and in several lailway acts, costs are specifically provided for but this act is silent on the subject of costs. By the 19th section the principal officers of her Majesty's Oidnance ate empowered to contract for the purchase of any land they may require , and if such principal officers and the owner do not agiee, then it shall be lawful for such principal othcets to apply to two or more justices of the peace &c, to put them in possession of the land, and a jury is also to be summoned, who "shall hnd the compensation to be paid, either for the absolute purchase of such lands, buildings, or other hereditaments, or foi the possession or use thereof " It is contended that, upon the piopei construction of this section, by the teim "compensation" is intended the mere value of the land taken, And that anything which may have been ineuiied for the purpose of selling the land cannot form any element in the amount to be awarded by the jury It may be that such a construction imposes a hardship upon a paity who is compelled to part with his land It may be that the expenses inclined for the put pose of obtaining the compensation exceed the value of the land itself This may be so, but by other sections of the act it appears that the legislature by this term intended this construction It may be admitted that the wotd compensation, being laiger than " value," is for the purpose of embracing cases of severance The ttue meaning of this word may be gathered from the act itself How is the purchase-money piovided foi in particulai cases? Sup-[443]-pose A to be tenant for life wrth remainder to B, and thit the money to be paid into the Court of Exchequer (as rs provided by the 21st section) to abide the direction of the Court and to be subject to the inteiestb of both parties It would be unfair to A that B should participate in a share of that portion of the amount paid into the Couit ot Exchequer, which had been awarded foi the expenses incurred by A in obtaining the compensation If it had been intended that the expenses should be paid, it would have been provided in the act that so much was for expenses, and so much fot land [Alderson, B In Et /laite Pasmoie (1 You & Coll 75), which was a case under the London Bridge Act, I held that a tenant for life of lands sold under the provisions of that act was not entitled to his costs out of the fund aiising from the sale, and I thete said, after obseiving that the 30th section was the one which gave me jurisdiction -"That sectiou enacts that the 1 EX; 444. TN RE LAWS 189 moriey agreed or awarded to be paid for the tenements to be purchased by virtue of this act shall, under the circumstances therein mentioned, be paid into this court; and; that upon petition to this Court the money so paid shall be applied, under its direction, in the discharge 'of any debt or debts, or such other incumbrances,' as the Court shall authorise to be paid, affecting the same tenements, [[ere the word 'debts' means debts for which the estate is pledged; the word 'incumbrances' means incumbrances on the estate...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R (The Secretary of State for War) Justices of County Cork
...Act of 1845, and can only be regarded as amendments of the Defence Code proper. rrrE Queen v. Vol. II.] QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION. 129 (1) 1 Exch. 441. The jury spoken of in sect. 12 of 23 & 24 Vict. c. 112 must be g. B. Div. a Defence Act jury under the Act of 1842, presided over by *899, Jus......
-
Harvey v Harkin
...JJ. (1) A printed form similar to that in Reg. (Moore) v. Abbott, [1897] 2 I. R. at page 364. (2) Since reported—[1897] 2 I. R. 362. (1) 1 Exch. 441. (2) 6 Ch. D. 521. (3) 16 C. B. (N. S.) 310. (4) L. R. (N. S.) 73 (1833). (5) 8 M. & W. 579. (1) 8 M. & W. 579. (2) 7 A. & E. 124. (3) 1 Exch.......
- University College, Oxford, Master & Fellows v Secretary of State for Air