Smith v Peat
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 17 November 1853 |
| Date | 17 November 1853 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 156 E.R. 69
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 2 C. L. R. 424, 23 L J. Ex. 84. Referred to, Joyner v. Weeks, [1891] 2 Q B 31.
[161] smith v. PEAT. Nov. 17, 1853 -In an action by a lessee against an assignee for damage sustained by the former in consequence of the neglect of the latter, while he continued assignee, to repair the premises, pursuant to a covenant in the lease, it appeared that, m June, 1843, the plaintiff assigned the lease to the defendant; in October, 1851, the defendant assigned the lease to T ; and, in June, 1852, T. ass^ned the lease to H., who, in August, 1852, surrendered it to the ground landlord. It was proved that in July, 1852, the premises were dilapidated, but there was no evidence of their state at any prior time -Held, that tie plaintiff was entitled to recover from the defendant substantial damages, and not nominal damages only. [S. C. 2 C. L R. 424, 23 L J. Ex. 84. Referred to. Joyner v. Weeks, [1891] 2Q B 31.] The declaration stated that the plaintiff was possessed, for the residue of a term of twenty-one years from the 25th of December, 1839, of a certain dwelling-house and premises, and which term was theretofore created by a certain deed, whereby one G. Ireland and W. Ireland demised, and one T Smith demised, ratified, and confirmed tbe said dwelling-house and premises to the plaintiff for the term aforesaid , and the plaintiff did, in and by the said deed, covenant with the said T. Smith, that the plaintf should and would, from time to time and at all times during the said term, at his own costs and charges, well and substantially repair, amend, uphold, &c. the said dwelling-house and premises, and keep the same in good and substantial order, condition, and repair, reasonable use and wear thereof and damage by fire only exeepted; and also that he would, in the year 1842, and in every succeeding third year of the term, at the like costs and charges, well and sufficiently and in a workmanlike manner paint the wood, lead, iron, and stonework of the exterior of the dwelling-house usually painted ; and also that he would, in the year 1846, and every succeeding seventh year of the same term, at the like costs and charges, and in like manner, paint the wood, lead, &c. belonging to the interior of the dwelling-house usually painted, and the plaintiff, being so possessed of the said dwelling-house and premises, by dead assigned the same and all the estate and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Metge v Kavanagh
...Bell v. HaydenUNK 9 Ir. C. L. R. 301. Williams v. WilliamsELR L. R. 9 C. P. 659. Maddock v. MalletUNK 12 Ir. C. L. R. 173. Smith v. PeatENR 9 Ex. 161. Turner v. LambENR 14 M. & W. 412. Moroney v. FergusonUNKIR I. R. 8 C. L. 551. Luxmore v. RobsonENR 5 B. & Al. 584. Nixon v. DenhamUNK 1 Jebb......
-
Cooke v Midland Great Western Railway Company of Ireland
...at p. 355. (1) [1903] 2 K. B. 331. (2) [1905] 2 I. R. 378. (3) [1904] 2 I. R. 317. (1) 1 Q. B. D. 29. (2) [1904] 2 I. R. 317. (1) L. R. 9 Ex. 161. (1) [1897] 1 Q. B. (2) [1904] 2 I. R. 317, 335. (3) 1 Q. B. D. 35. (4) 3 Q. B. D. 327. (1) [1904] 2 I. R. 317. (1) [1902] 1 K.B. 618. (2) [1904]......
-
Davies v Underwood
...was destroyed by the act of the plaintiffs. The diminution in value of the reversion is the real measuie of damages . Smith v. Peat (9 Exch. 161), Tiunei v. Lamb (14 M. & W. 412). The reversion could not have been sold for anything at all, the lease having been avoided by reason of the brea......
-
Bell v Hayden
...C. & K. 553. Macnamara v. VincentUNK 2 Ir. Ch. Rep. 481, 503, 505. Marriott v. CottonUNK See 2 Ir. Ch. Rep. 504, ad. cal. Smith v. PeatENR 9 Exch. 161; S. C., 2 Com. Law Rep. 424; 23 Law Jour., Exch., 84. Doe v. Rowlands Supra. Marriott v. Cotton Supra. F. N. B. 145 R, 7 & 12 E, 3 Lit. Cove......