Vernon v Earl Manvers
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 19 December 1862 |
| Date | 19 December 1862 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 54 E.R. 1278
ROLLS COURT
S. C. 32 L. J. Ch. 244; 7 L. T. 553; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 9; 11 W. R. 133.
[617] vernon v. earl manvers. Nov. 19, Dec. 2, 1862. [S. C. 32 L. J. Ch. 244; 7 L. T. 553 ; 9 Jur. (N. S.) 9 ; 11 W. R. 133.] Trustees had powers of sale and exchange, and they were to lay out the money in the purchase of hereditaments or in paying off mortgages, charges or ineumbranccs affecting the settled estates. They sold part and received 3000, which they handed over to the tenant for life, who retained it in payment of expenses incurred by him in enclosures. The tenant for life died without having charged the inheritance with the outlay. Held, notwithstanding the provisions of the Enclosure Acts could not now be complied with, that the Court had power to declare that the moneys properly expended were a charge on the allotments. By settlements, dated in 1811, 1832 and the 14th of Juno 1852, the estates of Earl Manvers in Nottingham, Lincoln, &c., were settled. Under these deeds the Plaintiffs (the trustees) had power of sale and exchange, with the consent of the tenant for life. By the first two (1811 and 1832) it was declared "that the trustees shall, with all convenient speed, pay and apply the money to arise by such sale or sales, or to be paid for equality of exchange, in or towards satisfaction and discharge of the principal sums of money which shall then be a charge upon or affect the manors and other hereditaments hereinbefore mentioned, and lay out and invest the surplus, if any, of such money in the purchase of other hereditaments," &c. By the third (1852) the trustees were to lay out the money to arise from any sale, or paid for equality of exchange, in the purchase of other hereditaments, or " to apply any part of such money, as aforesaid, in or towards paying off and discharging any mortgage or other charge or incumbrance which should or might affect all or any of the hereditaments then subject to the uses of the said settlement, instead of laying the same out in the purchase of lands." 31BEAV. 618. VERNON V. MAN VERB 1279 The subsequent facts, as certified by the Chief Clerk, were as follows:-A gum of 3000 was received by the Plaintiffs (the trustees) in the month of June 1852 as the purchase-money for certain pieces of land at Snenton, in the county of Nottingham, then forming part of the settled estates, and which were sold by the Plaintiffs under the powers contained in the settlements [618] or some of them. This sum was, on or about the 16th of September 1852, transferred from the banking account of the trustees to the private account of Earl Manvers (since deceased), the tenant for life. At the time of the transfer, Charles Herbert, late Earl Manvers, had paid or advanced, out of his own moneys, sums amounting altogether to 2192, Os...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Longfield v Bantry
...2 App. Cas. 698, 710. In re Bayley's settlementELR L. R. 6 Ch. App. 590. Choat v. Yeates 1 J. & W. 112. Vernon v. Earl MancersENR 31 Beav. 623. Lyddon v. EllisonENR 19 Beav. 565. Sykes v. SykesELR L. R. 13 Eq. 56. Case v. Drosier 2 Kee. 764. Cochrane v. CochraneUNK 11 L. R. Ir. 361. Case v.......
-
Corbet v Corbet
...was arrested under the following circum Rolls. CORBET and CORBET. Bootle v. BlundellENR 19 Ves. 494; 1 Mer. 193. Vernon v. Earl ManversENR 31 Beav. 623. Webb v. De BeauvoisinENR 31 Beav. 576. Holford v. Wood 4 Ves. 75. Hewett v. SnareENR 1 De G. & S. 333. Choat v. Yeats 1 J. & W. 102. Phill......
-
Henry v Henry
...G. & Jo. 62. Bidwell's Settlement 11 W. R. 161. Bootle v. BlundellENR 1 Mer. 230. Hancox v. Abbey 11 Ves. 186. Vernon v. Earl ManversENR 31 Beav. 623. Greene v. GreeneENR 4 Madd. 156. Maddison v. Chapman 1 Johnst. & Hem. 470. Blake v. Bunbury 1 Ves. Jun. 523. Orrell v. OrrellELR L. R. 6 Ch.......