The Earl of Derby against Taylor and Another, Executors of Twist
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 June 1801 |
| Date | 09 June 1801 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 102 E.R. 193
IN THE COURT OF KING'S BENCH.
the earl of derby against taylor and another, Executors of Twist. Tuesday, June 9th, 1801. A grant by lessees for lives of all their estate, right, title, interest, &c. in the premises to one and his executors, habendum to Mm and his executors for 99 years if the lives should so long live, in as large, ample, and beneficial way, &c. as the grantors, their heirs, &c. Held, is no assignment of the freehold, and consequently not of the whole interest of the grantors in their lease; and there fore the reversioners (the lives being expired within the term) cannot maintain covenant against the under lessee for not delivering up the premises in good repair. . This was an action for a breach of covenant, wherein the declaration stated, that the late Earl of Derby, whose grandson and heir the plaintiff is, being seised in fee of a messuage and other premises therein described, by indenture dated 14th December 1756, made between the late earl of the one part, and Thomas Taylor of the other part, demised to Taylor, his heirs and assigns, the said premises, &c. for the lives of three persons therein named, all of jvhom are now dead. That Taylor covenanted for himself, his heirs and assigns,* with the late earl, his heirs and assigns, to repair and keep in repair the premises demised during the said term, and at the end of the term to deliver them up so repaired to the late earl, his heirs and assigns. The declaration further stated the entry and seisin of Taylor the lessee, the death of the late earl, and K. B. xxxi.-7 194 THE EARL OF DERBY V,r TAYLOR 1 EAST, 503. the descent of the reversion to the plaintiff. And that afterwards all the estate, right, title and interest, property, claim and demand whatsoever, of T. Taylor, of and in the demised premises with the appurtenanr[503]-ces came to and vested in J. Twist by assignment; by virtue whereof Twist entered into and became seised of the demised premises for the remainder of the term demised to Taylor. The declaration further stated the death of the three persons for whose lives the estate was demised ; and averred that Twist suffered the premises to be out of repair, and that at the end of the term they were delivered up to the plaintiff without being repaired. The defendants pleaded several pleas, but the only material one was that which denied that all the estate, right, title...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burton v Barculay and Perkins
...the deed poll was to explain and limit the generality of the grant, not to defeat or contradict it; Co. Lit. 21. Earl of Derby v. Taylor (1 East, 502), GoodtUle v. Gibbs (5 B. & C. 709), Hob. 170, 8 Eep. 154 b., Shep. Touchst. 109, Prest. on Conv. 440. That Bates's interest passed minus the......
-
Reynolds v Reynolds
...Fausset v. CarpenterENR 5 Bli. N. S. 75; S. C. 2 Dow. & C1. N. S. 232. Mosely v. MotteuxENR 10 M. & W. 533. Earl of Derby v. TaylorENR 1 East, 502. Whittick v. JohnstonENR Gow. 173. Lennon v. Napper 2 Sch. & Lef. 685. Martin v. CotterUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351. Right v. BawdenENR 3 East, 260. S......
-
Timothy Murphy, in Replevin, v John Leader, M. D
...Brandling v. BarringtonENR 6 B. & C. 475. Warburton v. lvie 1 Jones, 313 Fury v. Smith 1 Hud. & B. 735, 756. Earl of Derby v. TaylorENR 1 East, 502. Maunsell v. Russell 2 Ir. Law Rep. 205, note. Mayor of Carlisle v. BlamireENR 8 East, 487. Crusoe v. Bugby 3 Wils. 234. Wilson v. KnubleyENR 7......