Ripley v Moysey

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
Judgment Date09 March 1836
Date09 March 1836
CourtHigh Court of Chancery

English Reports Citation: 48 E.R. 430



Cf. In re Middleton, 1882, 19 Ch. D. 552.

430 BIPLEY V. MOYSEY 1 EBEH 618. [578] eipley v. moysey. March 9, 1836. [Of. In re Middleton, 1882, 19 Ch. D. 552.] The general personal estate of a testator is liable to all costs occasioned by his mistake, or rendered necessary for the purpose of obtaining the opinion of the Court on the construction of his will, though some of those costs may have been incurred in proceedings affecting the real estate only, and the result of which was to benefit a, devisee of the real estate. The testator devised a real estate, subject to the payment of a corn rent, for a. charitable purpose to Christopher Wilson. It appeared, by the Master's report, that the Christian name of the person, to whom the testatrix intended to give the estate, was James instead of Christopher. Mr. Beames and Mr. Simons, for the residuary legatee, submitted that the costs of the inquiry as to the identity of James Wilson, and the costs of making the Attorney-General a party, for the purpose of having the charge of the corn rent declared void under the Mortmain Act, ought to be borne by the devisee, for whose...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Wigmans v AMP Ltd
    • Australia
    • High Court
    • 10 March 2021
  • Stringer v Harper
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 24 March 1859
    ...the costs of suit, and that it was the first fund to be applied to that purpose; Browne v. G-roombiidge (4 Madd. 495); Eipley v. Moys&y (1 Keen, 578); Pickford v. Brown (2 Kay & J. 426). Mr. Bovill, for a mortgagee. Mr. Marten, in reply. [587] the master of the rolls [Sir John Romilly]. I h......
  • Morrell v Fisher
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 5 May 1851
    ...according to the general rule, on the residuary personal estate. They cited Brown v. Groombridge (4 .Madd. 495; see also Eipley v. Moysey, 1 Keen, 578). , . the vice-chancellor [Sir J. L. Knight Bruce] said that, as regarded the costs of the present suit, and the Defendant's costs in Hall v......
  • Sanders v Miller
    • United Kingdom
    • High Court of Chancery
    • 1 January 1858
    ...which devise, by law, had enured to the benefit of the heir. They cited Eyre v. Marsden (4 Myl. & Craig, 245; and see Ripley v. Moysey, 1 Keen, 578; and Pickfwd v. Brmvn, 2 Kay & J. 426; Wilson v. Squire, 13 Sim. 212). Mr. Lloyd and Mr. Hardy, for the next of kin. Mr. E. Palmer and Mr. E. M......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT