West v Laing
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 05 November 1855 |
| Date | 05 November 1855 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 61 E.R. 929
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Practice. Further Consideration. Suit by Summons.
[331] west. laing. Nov. 3, 5, 1855. Practice. Further Consideration. Suit by Summons. In a suit commenced by summons the Court may decide questions between parties entitled to the residuary estate, if those questions are founded upon the decree ; but it cannot go out of the decree, and if that did not extend beyond estate not specifically bequeathed; the Court cannot determine nor direct inquiries as to a question of conversion of leaseholds, involving the assumption of their being specifically bequeathed. In such a case, under a decree made on a summons, as well as on bill, if the decree is insufficient, it must be reheard. This was an adjourned summons from Chambers in a suit instituted by administration summons. The decree made on the summons as to the property in question directed the usual account of the personal- estate of the testator not specifically bequeathed come to the hands of the executors, &c. The usual accounts of debts, funeral expenses and legacies, and the usual direction for applying the personal estate not specifically bequeathed in a due course of administration, and in payment of the legacies. The Chief Clerk made his certificate, and he found, among other things, that the residuary personal estate consisted of several leasehold houses. The proceedings under the summons were attended by parties interested, named Donnell and others, who objected neither to the decree nor to the certificate. After the certificate had been duly signed by the Judge, and the, time had elapsed for objecting to it, those parties applied to have a declaration that the rents of the leaseholds ought to have been from time to time invested, or otherwise that the leaseholds ought to have been sold, and for further inquiries consequent on such declaration. The question raised being in fact whether the leaseholds were specifically bequeathed to the tenant for life to enjoy the rents, or whether they were part of the general estate, and ought to have been converted and invested. V.'-C. vi.- 30 930 WEST;V; LAlM 3DEEWKY.3S2. On the cause coming on on further consideration in Chambers, the above-mentioned application for a decla-[332]-ration and further inquiries was made by the Donnells; and two questions were argued-whether, generally, under an administration order made upon summons, the Court could determine questions arising as to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v Spilsbury
...c. 86, s. 45, and therefore that the Plaintiff ought to pay the extra expense occasioned by his having filed the bill; West v. Laing (3 Drew. 331); Fuller v. Green (24 Beav. 217). the vice-chancellor [Sir E. T. Kindersley]. The only question is with regard to the suit having been commenced ......