Kelly, Grantee; Rattey Grantor

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 15 May 1893
• Date: 15 May 1893
• Court: Chancery Division (Ireland)

Appeal.

Before WALKER, C., and FITZ GIBBON and BARRY, L.JJ.

KELLY, GRANTEE;

RATTEY GRANTOR

Christie v. PeacockeUNK 30 L. R. Ir. 646.

Verschoyle v. Perkins 13 Ir. Eq. R. 72.

Chute v. BusteedUNK 16 Ir. C. L. R. 222: see at p. 246; per Christian, L.J.

Pluck v. DiggesENR 5 Bli N. S. 31.

, 1891 — Fee-Fee grant made in 1846 — Relation of landlord and tenant.

VOL. XXXII.] Q. B. & EX. DIVISIONS. 445 KELLY, GRANTEE ; RATTEY, GRANTOR (1). Appeal. 1893. Redemption of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1891-Fee-farm grant made in 1846- May 5, 15. Relation of landlord and tenant. The Redemption of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1891, deals only with the rights of parties standing in the relation of landlord and tenant. The rent created by a fee-farm grant, dated February 9, 1846, which did not create this relation, cannot be redeemed, nor can the fair rent of the lands on which it is charged be fixed under the said Act. APPEAL by Charles Kelly from an order of the Land ComÂmission, dated 10th February, 1893, whereby an originating notice, served by him, claiming to redeem the rent payable out of the lands of Lalistown and Ushna Hill, under the Redemption of Rent (Ireland) Act, 1891, was set aside. The rent in respect of which the originating notice was served was created by a deed dated 9th February, 1846, whereby William Henry Magan demised and granted to John Hubert Kelly part of the lands of Lalistown and Ushna Hill, containing '11 A. 3R. lip. Irish plantation measure, together with part of the bog of Lalistown, containing 18A. 3R. 20p., together with the house and offices built thereon, situate in the Barony of RathÂconnell, and County of Westmeath, subject to certain exceptions and reservations : to hold the said demised premises unto the said John Hubert Kelly, his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, from the 1st day of November then last past for ever : the said John Hubert Kelly, his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, yielding and paying therefor and thereout, yearly, during the said term, unto the said William Henry Magan, his heirs, executors, administrators, and assigns, the yearly rent or sum of £320, payable half-yearly. At the date of the service of the originating notice and of this appeal the estate, interest, and rights of the grantor in this fee-farm grant were vested in William Rattey (the respondent), while (1) Before WALKER, C., and FITZ GIBBON and BARRY, L.JJ. 446 LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L: R. I. Appeal. the estate, interest, and rights of the grantee thereunder were 1893.' vested in Charles Kelly (the appellant). KELLY, The Land Commission dismissed the originating notice, on the Grantee ; BATTEY, ground that the Redemption of Land (Ireland) Act, 1891, dealt Grantor. only with the rights of persons standing in the position of landÂlord and tenant. From this decision the present appeal was taken. Matheson, Q. C., and J. H. Edge, for the appellant : There is nothing in the Redemption of Rent Act which shows that it is to be confined to cases where the relation of landlord and tenant exists : the word " landlord " does not occur in the Act. The Act begins with the word " person " : the word " tenant " occurs only where it prescribes the rights of the parties in the event of the redemption not being agreed to. The word " tenant " includes a tenant holding under a fee-farm grant : 48 & 49 Vict. c. 73, s. 26. The word " holding " is not defined in this Act. The definition of this word in the Act of 1881 cannot apply to this Act, because that definition in its essence implies that the contract of tenancy which it involves is a determinable interest, while the Redemption of Rent Act admittedly applies to perÂpetual interests. It can only mean " a parcel of land " in this Act. In the Act of 1887 the word includes land held under fee farm grant : 50 & 51 Viet. c. 33, s. 8. So, too, with the word " rent " : it may include fee-farm rent : 48 & 49 Viet. c. 73, s. 9; 50 & 51 Vict. c. 33, s. 8. Section 3 says the Act should be interÂpreted as in pari materia with the Land Purchase Acts : the words "holding," "rent," and " tenant," if interpreted as in those Acts, will not exclude the appellant from this Act. It is plain at least that these words should not receive a technical construction to exclude a large class from the benefit intended...