Rent
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1744 |
| Date | 01 January 1744 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 21 E.R. 1105
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
[364] CAP. XLIX. bent. (A) In what Cases there may be Remedy for Rent in Equity, when none at Law. (B) In what Cases the Lessee may be relieved against the Payment of Rent in Equity. (A) in what cases there may be remedy for rent in equity, when none at law. 1. If a Rent be devised by Will in Writing, a Court of Equity may compel the Tenant of the Land to give Seisin, because by Intendment the Tenant of the Land was Inops Consilii at the Time of the Devise. Moor, 805; Lat. 147. 2. So if a Man grants a Rent-seek, Equity will decree Seisin to be given, and the Rent to be paid to the Grantee. 1 Rol. Abr. 378; [Davy v. Davy,] 1 Chan. Ca. 147. 3. A Bill was exhibited for the Payment of £3 for a Rent of £5 per Ann. Arrear, for twelve Years, suggesting that the Deed by which it was created was lost; and there being Proof that it was constantly paid before the twelve last Years, the Master of the Rolls decreed that the Arrears and growing Rent should be paid, because it did not appear what Kind of Rent it was, and so no Remedy at Law. Hil. 20 & 21 Car. 2 [1670], Collet and Jagues, 1 Chan. Ca. 120. (Vide S. C. ante [1 Eq. Ca. Abr.], 32.) 4. So where a Bill was brought, suggesting, that the Plaintiff did not know the Nature of the Rent, nor the Boundaries of the Land, so as to be able to declare with Exactness; the Court said, that it ought to be decreed; but at the Importunity of the Defendant directed a Trial, whether there was any such Grant or not. Cox v. Foley, 1 Vern. 359. The Bill stated Plaintiff's title to a Fee Farm Rent issuing out of certain Estates of Defendant; that such Fee Farm Rent had been regularly paid to Plaintiff, and to those under whom he claimed until, &c., since which time the Sum of, &c., had accrued and was due to Plaintiff for Arrears; that he could not distrain on the Lands, they having undergone various Alterations and that great part of Defendant's Revenues arising from the said Estates consisted of Tolls and other incorporeal Matters by Reason of which Plaintiff was deprived of his Remedy at Law. The Answer admitted Plaintiff's Title to the Rent and Arrears due, but denied that the Lands had undergone Alteration, and alleged that the Estates were not able to pay the Rent to Plaintiff, and that for that 1106 RENT 1EQ. CA. ABE. 365. Reason the Rent had not been paid; and insisted that the Plaintiff's Remedy was at Law. Sir Lloyd Kenyon, Master of the Rolls, This...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
-
Oldham v Hubbard
...as not within the statute of Geo. 2. But that opinion rests on no solid foundation, and the reasons for it nowhere appear; Meeley v. Webber (2 Eq. Ca. Abr. 704), Talbot v. Salman (Ibid.). March 20. the vice-chancellor [Sir J. L. Knight Bruce]. The Plaintiff in this cause sues as executor of......
-
Paget against Gee
...A case to that purpose was before Lord Macclesfield. Decree Apportionment. Mr. Wilbraham mentioned a case in the Exchequer, of Mully v. Webber [2 Eq. Ca. Abr. 704], where tithes were apportioned. Vide Talbot v. Salmon. Wilson v. Barman, 29th July 1755 [post, 279]. Money placed in the funds,......
-
Aynsley v Wordsworth
...294) in Bunbury is unintelligible ; referring to Muley v. Webber (2 Eq_. Ca. Abr. 704) ; where an Apportionment was decreed. Talbot v. Salmons (2 Eq. Ca. Abr. 704) is no Decision upon tho Point; and Hawkins v. Kelly (8 Ves. 308) was compromised. Time, by analogy to the Statute, affords tho ......
-
Annuity and Rent-charge
...never afterwards have a Writ of Annuity, for his Remedy is extinguished by his own Folly. Poph. 86; Co. Lit. 148. Vide Title Rent (A) [1 Eq. Ca. Abr. 364] English Reports Citation: 22 E.R. 54 Chancery Division Annuity 1 and Rent-charge 54 ANNUITY AND RENT-CHARGE 2 EQ. CA. ABK. 61. [61] CAP.......