Roe, on the demise of Gregson, Widow, against Harrison
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 25 April 1788 |
| Date | 25 April 1788 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 100 E.R. 229
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
roe, on the demise of GREGSON, Widow, against harrison. Friday, April 25th, 1788. If a lease contain a proviso, that the lessee and his administrators shall not set, let, or assign over, the whole or part of the premises without leave in writing, on pain of forfeiting the lease, the administratrix of the lessee cannot underlet without incurring a forfeiture. A parol licence to let part of the premises does not discharge the lessee from the restriction of such a proviso (a). The lessor's receiving rent after the forfeiture is no waiver, unless the forfeiture were known to him at the time. Ejectment for a messuage, and a warehouse and stable thereto belonging, in Manchester, tried at the last Lancaster Assizes, before Perryn, B., when the jury found a veidiet for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of this Court on a case stated. William Gregson, by indenture, in 1774, demised the premises in question to Samuel Harrison, his executors, &c., from the 25th December then next ensuing, for tweaty-oiie years, at the yearly rent of 261. payable quarterly ; in which indenture is contained a proviso in the words following, to wit; " In case the said Samuel Harrison, his executors or administrators, shall at any time during the said term set, let, or assign over,, the said hereby demised messuage or dwelling-house, or any part thereof, without the licence and consent of the said William Gregson, his executors, administrators, or assigns, for that purpose first had and obtained in writing, these presents, and every clause, matter, and thing herein contained, shall be absolutely null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever; and then and from thenceforth it shall and may be lawful to and for the said William [426] Gregson, his executors, administrators, and assigns, to enter into the said hereby demised premises, or into any part thereof in the name of the whole, and possession thereof to detain and keep, in such manner as he or they could or might have held and enjoyed the same, in case these presents had not been made; and the said Samuel Harrison, his executors, administrators, and assigns, from thence to expel, put out, and remove." The lessee entered, and died, and the defendant took out administration to him, and became possessed of the demised premises. By indenture dated the 13th of November 1786, the defendant, as administratrix of her husband, demised the premises in question to hold from the 24th day of December then next for the term of nine years, at the yearly rent of 341.; and on which assignment is an indorsement in the words following: " Be it remembered that before the execution of the above-written indenture, it was mutually agreed between the parties thereto, that the said Sarah Harrison, her executors or administrators, shall pay the original rent reserved to William Gregson, his heirs or assigns, within seventeen days next after the same shall become due quarterly; but in case she shall neglect or refuse so to do, then it shall and may be lawful for the said Thomas Pilling, his executors, &c. to pay the same unto the said William Gregson, by and out of the rent above reserved, if he will accept thereof; and that his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wilbraham v Snow
...should not let without leave in writing on pain of forfeiture, a parol licence was held not to discharge the lessee from the proviso. 2 T. R. 425, Hoe v. Harrison. S. P. Cowp. 47, Mease v. Mease. 3 T. R. 590, 592, Littler v. Holland, and Brown, v. Goodman, there cited, note (b).(c) A releas......
-
Duppa, Executor of Baskervile, v Mayo
...hand and seal: a parol licence will not do ; (b) though acceptance of subsequent rent with notice is sufficient to waive the forfeiture. 2 T. R. 425, 430, Rot v. Harrison. Where the condition of re-entry is, " that if the lessee shall assign, b-ansfer^ or set over, or otherwise do ami put a......
-
Lessee Delap v Leonard
...Blac. 1249. Harvey V. Grabham 5 Ad. & EI. 61. Parteriche V. PowletENR 2 Atk. 383. Goss V. NugentENR 5 B. & Ad. 58. Gregon V. HarrisonENR 2 T. R. 425. Macher V. Foundling Hospital 1 V. & Bea. 191. Doe dem. Pitt V. LamingENR 4 Camp. 77. Dumpor's caseENR 4 Coke 119, b. Keiley V. Ahearne Batty,......
-
John Kean and Jane His Wife, Administratrix of William Craig, v James Strong and Others, Executors of John Maxwell
...1 B. Moo. 358. Sellers v. Bickford Ibid, 460. Robards v. StokerENR Palm. 110. Littler v. HollandENR 3 T.R. 590. Gregson v. HarrisonENR 2 T. R. 425. Cook v. JenningsENR 7 T. R. 381. Cordwent v. Hunt 2 B. Moo. 660. Barker v. FleetwoodENR Godb. 69. Carroll v. Read Cro. Eliz. 374. Cotton v. Cli......