Bank of Ireland v Feeney

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date15 July 1930
Date15 July 1930
CourtSupreme Court (Irish Free State)
[H. C., S. C., I.F.S.]
Bank of Ireland
and
Feeney

Non-conveyance of any estate in the lands charged - Power of sale - Declaration of trust - Attorney clause - Action of ejectment brought by chargeant - Right of chargeant to possession - Summary summons - Rules of the Supreme Court (Ir.)1905, Or. LV, r. 7 - Rules of the High Court and Supreme Court, 1926, Or. III, r. 1 (iv) (d) and (p).

The plaintiffs claimed possession, on summary summons, of certain holdings of land, of which the defendant was a tenant, comprised in an indenture of charge executed by the defendant in theirfavour. The indenture of charge contained a covenant by the defendant to pay to the plaintiffs, on demand, the balance for the time being owing by him to them on all accounts, together with interest from such demand until payment. This was followed by a charge by the defendant, as beneficial owner, of the holdings of land, and all the estate and interest which he might afterwards acquire therein, with the said balance and interest, in favour of the plaintiffs. The indenture also contained, inter alia, a proviso for release of the charge by the plaintiffs upon payment with or without demand; a proviso that the plaintiffs should have the power of sale conferred on mortgagees by he Conveyancing Act, 1881, with the modification that the money secured should be deemed to have become due when demand had been made or served, and that the restrictions imposed by s. 20 of the Act should not apply; a declaration by the defendant that he should thenceforth stand possessed of the tenant's interest, and of every other estate and interest which might thereafter be acquired by him in the lands thereby charged, in trust for the plaintiffs, subject to such equity of redemption (if any) as might for the time being be subsisting by virtue of the presents, and to dispose thereof as they should direct...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Incorporated Law Society of Ireland v Carroll
    • Ireland
    • Supreme Court
    • 1 January 1996
    ...only party who could bring civil proceedings to enforce a public right was the Attorney General. Moore v. The Attorney General (No. 2)IR [1930] I.R. 457 and dicta of McCarthy J. in S.P.U.C. v. Coogan (No. 1)IR [1989] I.R. 734 applied. A.G. v. PaperlinkDLRM [1984] ILRM 373 approved. 3. That ......
  • Incorporated Law Society of Ireland v Carroll
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 24 January 1995
    ......Bank accounts for the Rialto branch were opened in the name of Mr. Ryan at what was Mr. Carroll's branch of the Bank of Ireland in Ballsbridge. Mr. Ryan ......
  • O'Keeffe v O'Flynn Exhams; and Others
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 31 July 1992
    ...Defendants Citations: BANK OF IRELAND FINANCE LTD V DALY LTD 1978 IR 79 CROSSFIELD, EX PARTE 1840 3 IR EQ R 67 BANK OF IRELAND V FEENEY 1930 IR 457 NATIONAL BANK OF GREECE SA V PINIOS SHIPPING CO 1989 1 AER 213 TRUSTEE SAVINGS BANK V MAUGHAN UNREP COSTELLO 8.10.91 1991/13/3449 Synopsis: BAN......
  • The Belize Bank Ltd v Garry Young
    • Belize
    • Court of Appeal (Belize)
    • 12 February 2019
    ...I am speaking about. They are In re O'Neill, A Bankrupt [1967] NI 129, The Governor and Company of the Bank of Ireland v Michael Feeney [1930] IR 457 and Damodaran s/o P V Raman v Choe Kuan Him [1980] AC SIR MANUEL SOSA P Ducille JA 19 I agree totally with the judgment of the Learned Presid......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT