Ireland v Landy

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date20 February 1888
Docket Number(1886—P. No.253.)
Date20 February 1888
CourtUnspecified Court

Ex. Div.

Appeal

Before PALLES, C.B., and ANDREWS, J.

(1886P. No.253.)
F. S. IRELAND AND LYDIA B. IRELAND
and
KATE LANDY (BY ORIGINAL ACTION)
KATE LANDY
and
F. S. IRELAND AND LYDIA B. IRELAND (BY COUNTERCLAIM)

M'carthy v. SwantonUNK 14 L. R. Ir. 365.

Seymour v. Quirke Ibid. 97, 455.

Roe v. Cooney Ibid. 243.

Meredith v. HungerfordUNK 14 L. R. Ir. 438.

Beamish v. CrowleyUNK 16 L. R. Ir. 41, 279.

Maconchy v. RobertsonUNK 18 L. R. Ir. 483.

Lessee Porter v. FrenchUNK 9 Ir. L. R. 514.

Seymour v. QuirkeUNK 14 L. R. Ir. 97, 455.

Liddy v. KennedyELR L. R. 5 H. L. 134, 144.

Chorlton v. LingsELR L. R. 4 C. P. 374.

Expiration of lease Subdivision of holding

VOL. XXII.] Q. B. & EX. DIVISIONS. 403 F. S. IRELAND AND LYDIA B. IRELAND v. KATE LANDY (BY ORIGINAL ACTION) ; AND KATE LANDY v. F. S. IRELAND AND LYDIA B. IRE LAND (BY COUNTERCLAIM) (1). (1886-P. No. 253.) Expiration of lease-Subdivision of holding-Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, sect. 21. Subsequently to the passing of the Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, a lease for a term of years, dated the 1st May, 1783, which had been originally granted to a single lessee, expired. By deed, dated the 15th May, 1813, R., in whom the lessee's interest was then vested, assigned part of the lands comprised in the lease for the entire term to P., whose interest subsequently became, and was at the expiration of the lease, vested in three persons. The part retained by R. was, at the expiration of the lease, vested in L. :- Held, by the Court of Appeal (Lord Ashbourne, C., and Fitz Gibbon and Naish, L.JJ.), affirming the judgment of Palles, C.B. (from which Andrews, J., had dissented), that this case being one, not of subletting, but of subdivision, the assignees of the lease of 1783 (viz, the said three persons and L.) became, under the 21st section of the Act, on its expiration, tenants from year to year of the lands comprised therein, at the rent thereby reserved. The word " lessee " in the 21st section, and the word " tenant" in the 7th and 8th,sections of the Act can, in relation to one tenancy, include a plurality of persons. CAUSE SHOWN by the plaintiffs against a conditional order, for a new trial. The action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover the sum of 70, being the amount of two years' rent, due up to the 1st November, 1886, out of the lands of Kilmainham, Co. Meath. The rent was fixed by a judicial lease, dated the 6th February, 1884. The defendant entered an appearance, and at the same time lodged in Court the sum of 33 38. 5d. (1) Before PALLES, C.B., and ANDREWS, J. LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. R. I. The statement of claim was as follows : 1. The plaintiffs state that prior to the 1st May, 1882, the defendant held from the plaintiffs about twenty-five acres and twenty perches of the lands of Kilmainham, in the writ mentioned, under a lease for 99 years from the 1st May, 1783. 2. On the 1st May, 1882, the said lease expired, and the defendant continued in occupation of the said premises. The plaintiffs applied to her for an increased rent for the said holding, and she offered a rent of 18$. an acre, being an increase of about 4s. 3d. per acre, which amounted, in all, to a rent of 22 12s ld. per annum, instead of the former old rent of 17 6s. 5d. 3. The plaintiffs declined this offer, as insufficient, and applied to the County Court Judge of Meath to fix a fair rent, and the said Judge, after hearing what was urged by the defendant, and all claiming to be sub-tenants upon the said lands, fixed the fair rent thereof at the sum of 35 per annum, by an order duly made in that behalf on the 6th February, 1884. 4. The defendant appealed against the said order to the Court of the Land Commissioners. Said Commissioners at first made an order of the 7th May, 1886, that the fair rent of the said holding was the sum of 35 ; but subsequently said Commissioners stated they would remit said case to the said County Court, and. plaintiffs say said order of the 6th February, 1884, is now in full force and effect. 5. Subsequent to the said order of the 6th February, 1884, namely, on or about the 10th March, 1885, the defendant paid one half-year's rent, ending the 1st November, 1884, viz. 17 108. ; but she now neglects and refuses to pay the remaining two years' rent, for which this action is brought, and the particulars of which appear upon said writ. 6. In the alternative the plaintiffs say that the defendant is indebted to the plaintiffs in the sum of 70, money payable by the defendant to the plaintiffs for the defendant's use, by the plainÂÂtiff's permission, of messuages and lands of the plaintiffs. The defendant filed her defence, in which (par. 1) she traversed the allegation made in par. 1 of the statement of claim, and said that she held only a portion of the lands therein mentioned ; par. 2 VOL. XXII.] Q. B. & EX. DIVISIONS. 405 admitted the allegations contained in par. 2, so far as regards .Ex. Div. her continuing in possession of the said portion of the holding ; 1887. and par. 3 traversed the remaining allegations in the same IRELAND V. paragraph. LANDT. Par. 4. The defendant says that in the originating notice upon which the County Court Judge made the order in the statement of claim mentioned the defendant was the only person named as tenant ; and when the defendant appealed from the said order, and the said appeal came on for hearing, the Court of the Land ComÂÂmission made an order, dated the 6th November, 1885, allowing the plaintiffs herein (being the landlords in the originating notice upon which the said order of the County Court Judge was made) to amend their said originating notice by adding new parties thereto, and otherwise, as they might be advised ; and the said plaintiffs, pursuant to such order, amended the said originating notice, by adding as parties thereto four other persons in addition to the defendant, and by altering the description of the lands in said originating notice, and they served said amended originating notice upon the defendant and the said four other persons ; and it was upon said amended originating notice when it came before the said Court of the Land Commission that the order of the 7th May, 1886, mentioned in the 4th paragraph of the statement of claim was made. 5. The Court of the Land Commission made a second order upon the said amended originating notice, also bearing date the 7th May, 1886, declaring that the defendant and the four other persons in the last paragraph mentioned were the tenants of the lands comprised in the said expired lease, and remitting said amended originating notice to the County Court Judge of county Meath. Pursuant to the last-mentioned order, said amended notice was entered for hearing before such Judge on the 2nd November last, and with the consent of the plaintiffs and of the defendant the hearing was adjourned to the next Quarter Sessions of the said Judge, and the defendant says that under the circumstances, in this and the preceding paragraph stated, the plaintiffs are estopped from relying upon the said order of the 6th February, 1884, as now in full force and effect. 6. The defendant also says that the said order of the 6th 406 LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. R. I. Ex. Dir. February, 1884, was discharged and rescinded by the order of the 1887. Court of the Land Commission hereinbef ore mentioned. IRELAND 7. The defendant, while admitting for the purpose of this v. LARDY. defence that she holds the lands in the statement of claim mentioned, denies that she holds them by the permission of the plaintiffs. 8. The defendant says that before the service of the statement of claim herein she lodged in Court the sum of 33 3s. 5d., purÂÂsuant to Gen. Ord. XXX. under the Supreme Court of Judicature (Ireland) Act, 1877, and that she duly served the plaintiffs' solicitor with the notice prescribed by said order, and the defendant says that the said sum of 33 3s. 5d., so lodged in Court, is enough to satisfy the whole of the plaintiffs' claim in this action ; and, by way of counterclaim, the defendant in the original action says that the plaintiffs in the original action are indebted to her in the sum of 8 16s. 4d., money payable by them to her for money had and received by them to her use, being a portion of the rent paid by the defendant to the plaintiffs on or about the 10th March, 1885, as mentioned in the statement of claim. The plaintiffs filed their reply, joining issue on the defence, and traversing the allegations contained in the defendant's counterÂÂclaim, alleging that the said sum of 8 16s. 4d. was paid by the defendant, and received by them as rent due to them under a contract of tenancy existing between the said defendant and plaintiffs. The defendant filed a rejoinder, joining issue on the plaintiffs' reply to the defendant's counterclaim. The action was tried in the Michaelmas Sittings, 1886, before Mr. Justice Murphy and a jury of the city of Dublin ; and the jury found a verdict for the plaintiffs on their claim, and also on the defendant's counterclaim, and judgment was entered for the plaintiffs accordingly, reserving leave to the defendant to move to change the verdict into one for her. On the 27th January, 1887, the defendant obtained a condiÂÂtional order to set aside said verdict, and to enter same for her, or for a new trial, on the ground of misdirection. On the 2nd May, 1887, the plaintiffs showed cause, and, on the 3rd May, the Court VOL. XXII.] Q. B. & EX. DIVISIONS. 407 (Panes, C.B., Dowse, B., and Andrews, j.) made an order, of which Ex. Div. the curial part was as follows :- 1887. IIIELAN n "IT is ordered by the Court that the verdict had for the plaintiffs be v. set aside, on the ground of the misdirection of the said learned Judge, and in lieu thereof that a verdict be entered for the defenÂÂdant upon the cause of action contained in paragraphs 1 to 5 incluÂÂsive of the statement of claim, on the ground that the learned Judge ought, at the trial, to have so...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • O'Regan v White
    • Ireland
    • Court of Appeal (Ireland)
    • 11 Febrero 1919
    ...... tenancy - Sub-division under verbal agreement - No consent by landlord - Possession - Part performance - Enforceable contract - Land Law (Ireland) Act, 1881, sect. 5, sub-s. 3 - Purchase of Land (Ireland) Act, 1885, sect. 8 - Purchase by tenant - Real Property Limitation Act, 1833 (3 & 4 Wm. 4, ...2 of the Act of 1881 is identical with that in the Act of 1860, and must, on the authority of Ireland v. Landy (1) , have the same effect. The same case shows that the word "assignment" must have the same meaning as in the Act of 1860. If one thing is ......
  • Irish Land Commission v Forde
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 20 Diciembre 1917
    ....... (1916. No. 6553.) CASES DETERMINED BY THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND, AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, AND BY THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED. 1918. Landlord ...It has been held by Palles C.B. in Ireland v. Landy ( 1 ) that the Act of 1860 is in pari materia with the Acts of 1870 and 1881; but if there had been no such decision, I should without the slightest ......
  • Dooner v Odlum
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 14 Mayo 1914
    ....... K. B. Div. CASES DETERMINED BY THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND, AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN THE COURT OF APPEAL, AND BY THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED. 1914. Landlord ...Landy ( 1 ). I do not say that Mabella Odlum could not have been sued upon her personal covenant in the fee-farm grant, nor that her personal ......
  • Gill v McGovern
    • Ireland
    • High Court
    • 1 Enero 1946
    ...... have distrained upon either part for the entire rent, and for its non-payment he can maintain ejectment which must be for the entire holding: Ireland v. Landy(1). Sect. 52 of Deasy's Act, under which the ejectment is brought, provides that whenever a year's rent is in arrear in respect of ......
  • 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