Tweddell v Tweddell
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 14 November 1822 |
| Date | 14 November 1822 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 37 E.R. 992
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Hartopp v. Hartopp, 1855-56, 21 Beav. 265; Baker v. Bradley, 1856, 7 De G. M. & G. 616.
Reports of CASES ARGUED and DETERMINED in the HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY, during the Time of LORD CHANCELLOR ELDON, 1822-1824. By GEORGE TURNER and JAMES RUSSELL, Barristers-at-Law. J 832. Q] tweddell v. TwEDDELL. May 11, Nov. 2, 12, 14, 1822. [See Hartopp v. Hartopp, 1855-56, 21 Beav. 265; Baker v. Bradley, 1856, 7 De G. M. & G. 616.] A father, tenant for life, remainder to his first and other sons successively in tail male ; The eldest son, soon after he attained twenty-one, joined his father in suffering a recovery, an annuity was secured to him during his father's life, and parts of the estates were limited to the father in fee, the residue of them were resettled, the son taking back an estate for life, with remainder to his first and other sons in tail general, remainder to his daughters in tail general. The trans action to be considered as a mixed case of bargain and sale, imd of family arrangement ; and the eldest son having died without issue, a bill filed by his brother, the next remainderman in tail, who had done confirmatory acts, and accepted interests under the will of his father, to set aside the settlement as obtained by undue influence, was dismissed. Transactions of this nature between father and child, to be viewed with a reasonable degree of jealDusy, not in the light of reversionary bargains. Whether, after the lapse of twenty years, such a suit could be maintained at all. Quaere. Whether a remote remainderman can complain of a transaction between the tenant for life and the immediate remainderman, where the immediate remainderman makes no complaint.-Qucere. John Aynfley, being seized in fee of freehold estates in the counties of Northumberland and Dur-\£\-liam, by his will dated the 15th of January 1748, devised the same, together with certain copyhold hereditaments, which he had duly surrendered to the uses of his will, To the use of Francis Tweddell for life, with a limitation to trustees during his life to preserve contingent remainders, with remainder to the first and other sons of the said Francis Tweddell successively in tail male, with remainders over. Upon the death of the testator, in 1752, Francis Tweddell entered into the possession of the devised estates. He had issue three sons ; John Tweddell, his eldest son, Francis Tweddell the plaintiff, his second son, and Robert Tweddell one of the defendants, his youngest son. He had also issue two daughters. In the years 1770 and 1784 two acts of parliament were passed for inclosing the common fields in certain parishes, in which some of the devised estates were situate ; and allotments were made to Francis Tweddell the father, in respect of those estates. His proportion of the expenses of passing and carrying these acts into execution amounted to the sums of £518, 10s., and £180, and those sums were paid by him. By an indenture, dated the first of January 178."?, Francis Tweddell the father, by virtue of a power contained in the first mentioned act, demised the lands allotted to him under that act to Robert Ilderton, for the term of one thousand years, by way of mortgage for securing the sum of £369, being that part of the sum of 992 TURN. &B. 3. TWEDDELL ?'. TWEDDELL 993 £518, 10s. which he was enabled to charge upon the allotments ; and, by an inden ture bearing even date with the mortgage, Ilderton declared that his name was made use of as a trustee for Francis Tweddell the father. [n the month of June 1791, John Tweddell attained the [3] age of '2 I years ; and in the latter end of the year 1792, he agreed to join with his father in suffering recoveries of all the devised estates, and in limiting them to the uses after mentioned. Indentures of lease and release, dated the 4th and 5th of January 1793, were accordingly prepared and executed ; the release recited the facts before stated, that application was intended to be made to parliament, for an act to effect the inclosure of other commons, and that Francis Tweddell the father, had expended divers sums of money, to a very considerable amount, and more than a tenant for life could reasonably have been expected to do, in erecting hedges and fences upon, and in making other lasting improvements of the devised estates ; and then, in performance of the said agreement, and in consideration of tlie said sum of £369 (part of the aforesaid sum of £518, 10s.), then due to the said Francis Tweddell the father, by virtue of the said mortgage to the said Robert Ilderton, and of the sum of £149, 10s., being the residue of the said sum of £518, 10s., and of the said sum of £180, and of the several other sums of money expended by the said Francis Tweddell the father, as thereinbefore recited ; and also, in consideration of the covenants thereafter contained, on the part of the said Francis Tweddell the father, and of a bond entered into by him, for the payment to the said John Tu'eddell, during the life of him the said Francis Tweddell, of an annuity of £180, and of a further annuity of £20, in the event in the said bond expressed ; they the said Francis and John Tweddell conveyed, all the aforesaid freehold estates in the said county of Northumberland, to a tenant to the precipe for suffering a recovery ; which recovery, it was declared, should enure, as to the principal part of the same estates, to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Baker v Bradley
..."family arrange-[616]-ment," or, that according to Pullen v. Heady (2 Atk. 587), Gordon v. Gordon (3 Swanst. 400), Tweddell v. Tweddell (Turn. & R. 1), or any of the authorities cited in Palmer v. WJieeler (2 Ball & B. 18) and Harvey v. Cooke, (4 Euss. 34), and in Mr. Swanston's notes to Da......
-
Walker v Armstrong
...to Duke of Bedford v. Abercorn (1 Myl. & Cr. 312); Marquess of Exeter v. Marchioness of Exeter (3 Myl. & Cr. 321); Tweddell v. Tweddell (Turn. & R. 1); Barstonv. Kilvington (5 Ves. 593); Jenkins v. Quinduint (5 Ves. 596, n.); Marquess of Breculalbane v. Marquess of Chandos (2 Myl. & Cr. 711......
-
Servington Savery, - Appellant; Richard King and John King, - Respondents
...but as a family arrangement, as to which there might be motives which a court of equity could not reach: Twe.ddell v. Tweddell (Turn, and R. 1), King v. Hamlet (2 Myl. and K. 456; 3 Clark and F. 218). Here the remainder-man received a direct benefit; he was residing with his father, was sup......
-
Dudley Persse Esquire and Frances Persse otherwise Barry his Wife, Dudley Persse the younger, Katherine Henrietta Persse, Maria Persse, Richard Dudley Persse, and Elizabeth Persse, Infants, by the said Dudley Persse, their Father and next Friend, - Appellants; Robert Persse, Robert Henry Persse, the Honourable John Prendergast Vereker, James Lambert, Sir John Burke, Anthony Richard Blake, John Martyn, and the Earl of Rosse, - Respondents
...arrange-[124]-ment. All the cases upon that, subject are collected in Nenle v. Neale (1 Keen's Reports, 672), Tweddell v. Tweddell (1 Turner and Russell, 1). Mr. Knight Bruce and Mr. Jacob for the Respondents.-Is this1 such an agreement as a court of equity will carry into effect? 1st. The ......