Wilson v Tooker
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1714 |
| Date | 01 January 1714 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 2 E.R. 622
House of Lords
Mew's Dig. ix. 1777.
V BROWN. WILSON V. TOOKEK. [1714J case 5.-william wilson,-Appellant; james tooker,-Respondent [19th June IT 14]. [Mew's Dig. ix. 1777.] Exchequer annuities were assigned by way of mortgage, for securing £5000 and interest. The money not being paid, the mortgagee (after repeated notice to the executor of the mortgagor, and demand of his money) sold the annuities on the Exchange, at the market price. Held, that this was a good sale, and that there was no necessity of previously foreclosing the equity of redemption. decree of the English Chancery reversed. See Lockwood v. Ewer, 2 Atk. 303 ; which was the case of a mortgage of Eastlndia stock. 1 Wms. 261. Viner, vol. 15. p. 476. ca. 7. 2 Eq. C. Ab. 597. ca. 14. 608. ca. 3. In 1708, Edward Earl of Jersey, pursuant to an act of parliament, 6 Ann. paid into the receipt of the Exchequer, £6400, whereby he became entitled to an annuity of £400 per ann. for 99 years, commencing from the 25th of March 1708; and had four several orders delivered to him, for the payment of £100 each, dated the 23d of December 1708, and numbered 545, 546, 547, and 548. [194] On the 2d of May 1709, the Earl assigned all his interest in these four annuity orders, for the residue of the said term, to Thomas Thynne, Esq. who having borrowed of the appellant £5000, did on the 7th of July following, by deed poll assign to him the said four orders, for the remainder of the said term; but by an indenture of defeasance, dated the same day, the appellant covenanted, that upon being paid the said £5000, and interest, on the 8th day of January then next, he would assign and transfer the said annuity orders, and all his interest therein, and all benefit and advantage arising thereby, unto the said Thomas Thynne, his executors, etc. for all the remainder of the term then to come, free from- incumbrances: and by this deed Mr. Thynne covenanted to pay the money at the time limited. In April 1710 Mr. Thynne died, without having paid any part of this £5000; and the respondent having taken out letters of administration, with the will annexed, the appellant frequently in the course of two years afterwards, applied to him for payment of the principal-money and interest; intimating that unless the same was paid, he should be under the necessity, according to the constant practice in similar cases, of selling the annuity...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wayne v Hanham
...disposing of the property comprised in the security: Tucker v. Wilson (1 P, Wms. 261; 416 ASKEW V. MILLINGTON 9 HARE, 6*. S. C. 5 Bro. P. C. 193, Toml. edit,), Lockwood v. Ewer (2 Atk. 303), Kemp v. WesOrrodk (1 Ves. 278; Belt's Snpp. 141). June 3. the vice-chancellor [Sir G. J. Turner]. Th......
-
Russell v Plaice
...(Ld. Raym. 909 ; 1 Smith's Lead. Gas. 100). The same point also came before the Court in Tucker v. Wilson (1 P. Wins. 261 ; S. C. 5 Bro. P. C. 193), where a sale by a mortgagee, after notice to the executor of the mortgagor, was held good without a previous foreclosure. And in M'Leod v. Dru......
-
Tucker v Wilson
...[See Deverges v. Sandeman, [1902] 1 Ch. 589.] 15 Vin. Ab. 476, pi. 7 ; 2 Eq. Ca. Ab. 597, pi. 14, 608, pi. 3 ; 1 Bro. P. C. 494 [2nd ed. 5 Bro. P. C. 193]. Exchequer annuities mortgaged may be sold upon notice, without a foreclosure.(l) One possessed of an exchequer annuity for ninety-nine ......