Gillman v Murphy
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judgment Date | 25 January 1872 |
| Date | 25 January 1872 |
| Court | Unspecified Court |
Q. Bench.
Clifford v. ReillyUNKIR I. R. 4 C. L. 218.
Donoughmore v. ForrestUNKIR I. R. 5 C. L. 443.
Troy v. Kirk Alc. & Nap. 326.
Lease for Lives — Prohibition of Alientation Ejectment by Assignor against Assigne —— Estoppel.
34 .THE IRISH REPORTS. [I.R. EJECTMENT ON THE TITLE to recover part of the lands of CoolÂflugh. At the trial before FITZGERALD, J., at the Cork Spring Assizes, 1871, it appeared that the lands in question had been demised by lease dated 29th September, 1843, to William Gillman, the PlainÂtiff's father, for three lives, by lease containing a covenant and condition prohibiting alienation without the consent of the lessor. William Gillman having died intestate, the Plaintiff, his eldest son, entered into possession as special occupant, and by indenture of the 11th May, 1870, assigned the demised premises to the DeÂfendant for valuable consideration, the lessor's consent having been neither asked nor obtained. The Defendant had been in occuÂpation of the lands for some time previous to the assignment, and remained in occupation until the ejectment was brought. Upon this evidence the learned Judge directed a verdict for the Plaintiff, reserving liberty for the Defendant to move to have the verdict entered for him. A conditional order having been obtained accordingly, Waters, Q. C. (with him S. Ronan), now showed cause. The assignment was clearly void, as the requisites of the 10th sectiou of the Landlord and Tenant (Ireland) Act, 1860, were VOL. VI.] COMMON LAW SERIES. 35 not complied with : Clifford v. Reilly (1); Donoughmore v. For- Q. Bench. rest (2) ; Troy v. Kirk (3). 1872. GILLMAN Tr. O'Brien (with him H. P. Jellett, Q. C.) in support of the v. conditional order. MURPHY. The cases cited do not apply. They only- show that there could be no answer to an ejectment by the landlord. Troy v. Kirk (3) was the converse of this case, for it was an action by an unlicensed assignee against the assignor, and the plea was held good on the principle that In poi delicto potior eat conditio defenÂdentis. We rely here upon the estoppel, and submit that the Plaintiff, having executed this...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
O'Regan v White
... ... Owing to Irish land legislation, it cannot be here enforced, and there is a long line of authorities, from Gillman v. Murphy (1) , to this effect. I also concur in the point about the Statute of Limitations. Cur. adv. vult ... ...
-
Canavan v Burton
... ... The judgment sought to be set aside must stand, and this motion be refused with costs. Murphy, J.:I concur. Gibson, J.: The plaintiff knew that the defendant was judicial tenant; but there is no evidence that he was aware that the landlord ... ...
-
Re Turpin and Ahern's Contract
... ... The solicitor for the purchaser, Mr. Stanton, stated that on the morning of, but prior to, the sale, he called on Mr. Wm. Murphy, solicitor for Denis Ahern, and inquired as to the previous title of vendor, asking in particular whether any settlement had been executed on his ... a covenant against assignment, the assignment, being without consent, was void; and the settlement by the assignee was inoperative: Gillman v. Murphy ( 2 ); Doody v. Nolan ( 3 ). The incumbrances and limitations alleged to have been created by that settlement therefore never existed; ... ...
-
Tralee Urban District Council v McSweeney
... ... Faber (9) ... See also In re Companies Acts, Ex parte Watson (10) ; Canterbury Corporation v. Cooper (11) ... In Gillman v. Murphy (12) , a case under s. 10 of Deasy's Act, Barry J. is quoted as inter jecting in the course of the arguments the remark, "A party is not ... ...