Handcock v Handcock

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 17 May 1848
• Date: 17 May 1848
• Court: Court of Chancery (Ireland)

Chancery.

HANDCOCK

and

HANDCOCK.

10 Ir. Law Rep. 569.

472 CASES IN EQUITY. 1848. Chancery. HANDCOCK v. HANDCOCK. May 17. The decision WILLIAM HENRY HANDCOCK, in 1824, was seised in tail male of the of the Com mon Pleas in lands of Carintrilly and indebted by judgment to several persons; Handcock v. Handcock (10 and in September of that year he settled this estate on himself for Ir. Law Rep.) on the effect of life, with remainder to the issue of his marriage. In 1825, he a release of part of the deb- purchased the lands of Cartron in fee. In 1829, being about to tor's lands from a judgment in borrow a sum of money on mortgage from William Elias Handcock, discharging his other lands he procured the judgment creditors, in order to release the lands of doubted. 2 Cartron, to execute a deed poll dated 8th of April 1829, whereby, Statement. after reciting that W. Henry Handcock was desirous of having these lands clear of all incumbrances and had requested them to release the same from their incumbrances thereupon by their respecÂtive judgments to which they had agreed, they released, exonerated and discharged the lands of Cartron of and from their respdetive judgments and from all writs of execution and other writs, &c., and thereby agreed to indemnify and save harmless William Henry Handcock from all costs, &c., to be occasioned by reason of the lands being attached in execution or otherwise howsoever. On the 1st of May 1829, William Henry Handcock mortgaged the lands of Cartron in fee-simple, and the lands of Carintrilly for his life. W. Elias Handcock, in 1844, after the death of W. Henry Handcock, filed the present bill to foreclose the mortgage, against the daughters of W. Henry Handcock, who were tenants in tail in common ; and upon the Master's report the question was raised as to the effect of the deed of release upon the lands of Carintrilly, the defendants Handcocks contending that it operated as a discharge of all the lands from the judgments. The case having come on to be heard on the report and exceptions before the Lords CommisÂsioners in January 1848, they directed a case to the Court of CASES IN EQUITY. 473 Common Pleas upon the following points 1-" First, whether the said deed poll of the 8th of April 1829 had any and what legal effect or operation on the rights or remedies of the several parties entitled respectively to the said several judgments of Trinity Term 1824, and who executed the deed poll, or any of them, or the...