The Queen against Wall Lynn
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 30 May 1838 |
| Date | 30 May 1838 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 112 E.R. 881
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH
S. C. 3 N. & P. 411; 1 W. W. & H. 366; 7 L. J. M. C. 85; 2 Jur. 541.
[379] the queen against wall lynn. Wednesday, May 30th, 1838. A servant occupying a house cannot be said to hold it as servant, if it be not the master's house. R., a brewer, engaged L. as clerk, at a yearly salary, and agreed to permit him to occupy a certain house as his residence, free from rent, rates, and taxes, another clerk being also boarded and lodged in the same house if R. should require it, but paying for his board : and such salary and house-accommodation were to be in full satisfaction to L. for all perquisites, and for his expenses in the service. Either party might gave the other three months' notice of determining the service. L. occupied the house for some time, and then, bis health being impaired, he removed to another. L. agreed with the landlord for this house, but the latter considered R. as his tenant. The furniture of the first house, belonging to R., was removed to the second. L. was assessed to the poor-rates and window duty; and these as well as the rent, were paid by R. at the brewery. L. once objected to being registered as a voter by reason of occupying the house, but afterwards acquiesced, and voted at the election of a borough member. Subsequently, L. appealed against a poor-rate in which he waa assessed as the occupier, alleging that he held as servant only; and R. appeared on the hearing of the appeal, and claimed to be the party rateable. The sessions confirmed the rate, but stated the above facts for the opinion of this Court. Held that L., the clerk, and not R., was the rateable occupier. [S. C. 3 N. & P. 411; 1 W. W. & H. 366; 7 L. J. M. C. 85; 2 Jur. 541.] On the appeal of Wall Lynn against a poor-rate, made July 1st 1835, for the township of Sheffield, the sessions confirmed the rate, subject to the opinion of this Court upon a case which stated the following facts. Wall Lynn was assessed as the occupier of a house and garden, of which George Rodgers was named in the rate as proprietor. Catherine Eyre and Hannah Rawson are the proprietors of a brewery in the township of Sheffield. The appellant is their servant and head-brewer. From 18'28 to February 1833 he resided in a house situate in the brewery-yard, under an agreement dated 1st November 1828, made between him and the said Hannah Rawson (for herself and her partners), a copy of which was annexed to the case. By that agreement, the appellant, in consideration of tha salary and privileges after mentioned, 882 THE QUEEN V.LYNN 8 AD. & E. 380. agreed to serve Hannah Rawson, and her partners, &c., in the capacity of a clerk, brewer, and maltster, in the brewing, &c., upon their premises in Pond Lane, Sheffield, and in the management of their trade...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
The Queen against The Inhabitants of the Township of Bishopton
...been turned out. The real inquiry always is, what was the principal object in letting the party into possession 1 In Regina v. Wall Lynn (8 A. & E. 379), the pauper had been always rated and treated as tenant, which is not found to be the case here. Rex v. Seacroft (2 M. & S. 472), and Rex ......