Ridgway v Sneyd
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 07 June 1854 |
| Date | 07 June 1854 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 69 E.R. 266
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Simpson v. Ingleby, 1872, 26 L. T. 545.
Mining Lease. Minimum Rent. Injunction.
[627] ridgway v. sneyd. June 6, 7, 1854. [See Simpson v. Ingleby, 1872, 26 L. T. 545.] Mining Lease. Minimum Eent. Injunction. Coal mines were demised at a certain royalty per ton upon the coal which might be got, and also at the rent of 300 a year, or so much thereof as with the royalty should amount to that sum, such rent of 300 to be a minimum rent for the coal demised. And the lessee covenanted to pay the rents, and to work the mine. Held, that a Court of Equity would not restrain an action by the lessor for the minimum rent, although the coal proved to be not worth the expense of working; but that, if the lessor were to sue upon the lessee's covenant to work the mine, the Court would interfere. In applying the rule of caveat emptor to the case of leases of coal mines it must be remembered that everyone acquainted with that kind of property is aware that coal mines are liable to be interrupted by faults. If all the coal had been gotten by ancient workings that might be a case for equitable relief. KAY, 628. RIDGWAY V. SNEYD 267 John Ridgway, the Plaintiff in this cause, being the lessee and occupier, under different landowners, of adjoining mines and collieries, took from the Defendant a lease for twenty years, by an indenture, dated the 25th of December 1848, and made between the Defendant of the one part and the Plaintiff of the other part, of all the mines, veins, beds or strata of coal, cannel and slack, then opened or known, or which should at any time during the continuance of the said demise be found lying under the closes ofx land therein described, part of which belonged to the Defendant, and part had been sold by the Defendant to Richard Baddeley, reserving to the Defendant the coal under them, and power to get the same; and the Defendant also demised to the Plaintiff, in like manner, certain surface land, yielding and paying to the Defendant for the whole of the coal and cannel thereby demised, which the Plaintiff should get during the continuance of the demise, the rent and royalty thereinafter mentioned, that is to say, the sum of Is. for every 2520 Ibs. weight of such coal or cannel, and so in proportion for a less quantity than 2520 Ibs. And also yielding and pawing to the Defendant for the whole of the slack thereby demised, which the said Plaintiff should get during the continuance of the demise (except such part of the said slack as therein particularly mentioned), the rent and royalty thereinafter mentioned (that is to say), the sum of 6d. for every 2520 Ibs. weight of such slack, and so in proportion for a less quantity than 2520 Ibs. And also yielding and paying yearly and every year during the continuance of the said demise unto the said Defendant for the coal, cannel and slack thereby [628] demised the rent or sum of 300, or such part thereof as with the several rents, royalties and sums of money thereinbefore reserved would amount to that sum; and yielding and paying 4 per acre for the surface land demised : all such rents and royalties to be paid half-yearly upon the usual quarter days in June and December. And it was thereby provided and declared that the said yearly rent or sum of 300 thereinbefore reserved was so reserved as and for a minimum rent for the said coal, cannel and slack, there by demised, in each and every year during the continuance of the said demise; and that, subject to the proviso thereinafter contained, anything therein contained should not in anywise prejudice or affect the right of the said Defendant to have or receive the whole of the several other rents, royalties and sums of money thereinbefore reserved in respect of such coal, cannel and slack in each and every year during the continuance of the said demise, in which the same should exceed the sum of 300. And the lease contained clauses usual in mining leases, dividing the whole term into periods, at the end of which, if the rent and royalty thereby reserved in respect of the said coal, cannel and slack (exclusive of the said annual rent of 300 and the surface rent of 4 per acre) should exceed, in the aggregate, 300 a year, and if in any year of such period the several rents, royalties and sums of money, exclusive of the said annual rent of 300, and the said rent of 4 per acre, should not amount to the sum of 300, then the Plaintiff should be entitled to deduct from the excess of the aggregate amount of such rents, royalties and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Colby v Gadsden
...Watson v. Reid, (1 Russ. & Myl. 236); Stmthcomb v. The. Bishop of Exeter (6 Hare, 213); Dyer v. Hargrove (10 Ves. 505); Eigway v. tineyd (1 Kay, 627); Haywood v. Ctrpe (25 Beav. 140); Sugden's Vendors (p. 212 (14th edit.) ). Mr. Selwyn and Mr. Ward, for the Defendants, cited [417] Knatclihi......