Trower v Newcome
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 29 June 1813 |
| Date | 29 June 1813 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 36 E.R. 270
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Lord Brooke v. Rounthwaite, 1846, 5 Hare, 305; Smith v. Land & House Property Corporation, 1884, 28 Ch. D. 14.
[704] trower ;. newcome. Rolls. June 29, 1813. [See Lord Brooke v. Rounthwaite, 1846, 5 Hare, 305 ; Smith v. Land & House Property Corporation, 1884, 28 Ch. D. 14. j ò Ex relations Mr. Simpkinson.-Specific performance decreed against a purchaser at a public auction, where the representation in the particulars of sale (complained of as calculated to mislead) was so vague and indefinite that it ought to have put the purchaser on making previous inquiry. This was a bill, by the vendor, for specific performance of an agreement to purchase the advowson of Honychurch, in the county of Devon. The bill stated (which was admitted by the answer), that the Plaintiff being seised in fee of the advowson in question, caused the same to be set up to sale by auction, when the Defendant became the purchaser, according to the conditions of sale. The printed particulars contained a description of the situation, number of acres, &c., and added " a voidance of this preferment is likely to occur soon," but made no mention of the present incumbent. The Defendant, by his answer, said he was induced to attend at the sale by the representation in the particulars above noticed ; that the auctioneer, at the time of sale, said (in explanation) " that the living would be void on the death of a person " aged eighty-two," of which the Defendant took a note in writing, or a copy of the particulars ; and that he was, by such statement, induced to bid, and did bid accordingly ; and was declared th& purchaser, and signed the agreement. He then proceeded to state, that he (the Defendant) had, since the sale, discovered that the then present incumbent of the living was aged only thirty-two, upon which discovery, his (the Defendant's) solicitor, sent back the abstract (which had been furnished) ta the Plaintiff's solicitor, with a note on the margin, stating the representation made at the time of sale, with these words added ; " How does it become " void 1 " to which the Plaintiff's solicitors returned for answer, " We do not oon-" aider the purchaser entitled to call for any security [705] for the voidance of the " Kvkig, at the death of a person aged eighty-two. No such security was required " at the sale, and the auctioneer only stated that such a voidance would take place. 3MEE.706...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Flight v Booth
...Duke of Norfolk v. Worthy (1 Campb. 337), Wright v. Wilson (1 Mood. & Kob. 207), Stewart v. Alliston (1 Mer. 26), Trower v. Neuxambe (3 Mer. 704). Wilde Serjt. shewed cause. Where the misdescription, whether proceeding from intention or inadvertence, is such that the purchaser finds himself......
-
Drysdale v Mace
...notice afforded by the agreement of the deed of 1837 is notice of all its contents; Fenton v. Browne (14 Ves. 144), and Trower v. Newcome (3 Mer. 704). The price was regulated with reference to the risk of having to pay the annuity, and it would be most unjust to give the purchaser the bene......
-
Scott v Hanson
...but whether it was water meadow at all. The cases cited for the Plaintiff were Fenton v. Browne (14 Ves. 144), and Trower v. Newcmne (3 Mer. 704). the VlOE-CHANCELLOR took time to consider the case, and then gave judgment to the following effect:-I do not accede to the argument that the pri......
-
Leyland v Illingworth
...a patent matter, the purchaser cannot allege it as a misrepresentation. Scott v. Hanson (1 Sim. 13 ; 1 Russ. & My. 128) Trmuer v. Newcome (3 Mer. 704); Fenton v. Browne (14 Ves. 144), all lay down the same rule. In Price v. Macaulay there was a distinct definite misrepresentation. Here vagu......