In Doyle v Hanks

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 24 February 1871
• Date: 24 February 1871
• Court: Unspecified Court

Cas. Res.

Before WHITESIDE, C. J. PIGOT, C. B., KEOGH, O'BRIEN, FITZGERALD, MORRIS, LAWSON, and BARRY, J., and FITZGERALD, HUGHES, and DEASY BB.

DOYLE

and

HANKS.

— Jurisdiction of Chairman — Amount of Damages — Appeal.

VOL. VI.] COMMON LAW SERIES. 83 If that be the true construction of the Act, then the legal estate Com. Pleas. would have descended to the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs would 1872. have no title at law. MORRIS The case of Walsh v. Studdart (1) has been referred to as an MORRIS. authority in favour of the Plaintiffs, but the point which we are called upon to decide did not at all arise in that case. The quesÂtion there was, whether a deed of mortgage executed by a father, tenant for life, and concurred in by the son, tenant in tail in reÂmainder, barred the quasi estate tail, and the Court held that it did, and it therefore became necessary to consider the effect of a subsequent fee-farm grant ; but that fee-farm grant was made to the tenant for life, not to the tenant in tail in possession, and could not have barred the entail. Mr. Justice O'Brien uses exÂpressions to show that the estate in quasi tail, if subsisting, would, by that grant, have been converted into an estate in tail, which would have required an enrolled deed to bar it ; but that question does not arise in this case. We, therefore, allow the cause shown against the conditional order, with costs. Conditional order to enter the verdict for the Plaintiffs discharged. Attorney for the Plaintiffs : Bindon Scott. Attorneys for the Defendant : Cathcart and Hemphill. (CASE RESERVED FOR THE OPINION OF THE JUDGES) (2). Cas. Res. DOYLE v. RANKS. 1871. Common Law Procedure Amendment Act (Ireland), 1870-33 & 34 Vict. c. Jan. 23. 109, s. 6-Jurisdiction of Chairman-Amount of Damages-Appeal. Feb. 24. In an action of tort remitted to the Civil Bill Court, under the 33 & 34 Viet. c. 109, s. 6, the Chairman's jurisdiction to award damages is limited to £40 ; and an appeal lies from the Chairman to the going Judge of Assize. AcTiON for seduction, which had been remitted under the 33 & (1) I. R. 5 C. L. 478. MORRIS...