The City of London and Sir Fisher Tensh
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1744 |
| Date | 01 January 1744 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 94 E.R. 492
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
492 TERM. PASCH. 6 GEO. II. 1733 2 BABN. K. B. 267. the city of london and sir fisher tensh. The certainty which is required iu declaring in an action of covenant. In an action of covenant the plaintiffs declared, that in pursuance of the statute made 5 & 6 "W. & M. 10 (5), they granted a licence by indenture to Sir Thomas Garrard and Sir Fisher Tensh, for erecting lights within the city, during a certain term not yet expired; and that in consideration thereof Sir Thomas Garrard and the defendant covenanted that they or their assigns would pay to the plaintiffs the sum of 4001. every year at the Feast of St. Michael. The plaintiffs alledged, that Sir Thomas Garrard died on such a day, and that since his decease there was the sum of 8001. due for two years de redditu prsedicto at the Feast of St. Michael last past, which said sura of 8001. he ought to have paid at that day, but did not, to the plaintiffs damage, &c. The defendants by their plea demand oyer of the indenture, and then demur specially, and shew for cause first, that the plaintiffs have not alledged, that neither the defendant nor his assigns did pay this money at the day; secondly, that the plaintiffs alledge that 8001. was due de redditu prsedicto, whereas this is no rent; thirdly, that the words of the declaration are, Which said sum of 8001. the defendant ought to have paid at that day, whereas 4001. only was the yearly payment, and there-[267J-fore 4001. only could be said to be due at that day. In support of the first of these objections he cited 3 Cro. 348. Salk. 139. 5 Mod. 133. And in support of the second, he cited Browning's case in Plow. 131. He said farther, that the indenture set forth in the declaration varied in many respects from the indenture aet forth upon oyer; arid as those variances might have been taken advantage of at the trial upon non est facbum, he submitted it, they might be taken advantage of equally upon a demurrer, though they are not specially assigned for cause of it. The common serjeant was of the other side, and desired a day to answer these exceptions, which accordingly the Court gave him. Vide postea.
English Reports Citation: 94 E.R. 510
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH
the city of london and sir fisher tensh. What are the terms which the plaintiff must submit to, when he moves to amend his declaration. The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Parsons v Lloyd
...Selden's case, 1 Rush-worth, 364; Bro. Continuance, 48; Fitzherbert's Continuance, 3; Cro. Eliz. (467); Dyer, 175; Smith and Bouchier, 2 Barnard. 333; Stra. 993 (w); all shew that no justification can be under a void writ or process. A distinction is always made between officers and parties......