Knox v Waters

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 12 May 1856
• Date: 12 May 1856
• Court: High Court of Chancery (Ireland)

Chancery.

KNOX

and

WATERS.

Hackett v. DonnellyUNK 1 Ir. Eq. Rep. 231.

Berrington v. EvansENR 1 Y. & C., Ex., 484.

Murtagh v. Tisdall Fl. & K. 20.

Monck v. Paget 3 Cl. & F. 430.

Ogilvie v. Herne 13 Ves. 563.

Cattell v. SimonsENR 8 Beav. 243.

Monck v. Paget 3 Cl. & F. 430.

Hackett v. DonnellyUNK 1 Ir. Eq. Rep. 231.

43Q CHANCERY REPORTS. 1856. Chancery. KNOX v. WATERS. (Chancery) May 12. H., a judgment Tins case came before the Court upon a motion by way of appeal creditor, made order an from f - defend party made by his Honor the Master of the Rolls, under a ant in a suit, permitted a re- the following circumstances :- port and decree The defendant William Harvey was made a party to the suit, in to be made in the year 1828, respect of a certain judgment to which he was entitled, and which which omitted all mention of was a charge on the lands in the cause, and he filed his answer his claims. In 1855, he ob- accordingly. A decree to account having been made, the case went tamed an order giving him into the office, and a report was made which omitted all mention of liberty to file a charge and Mr. Harvey's rights, on which report a final decree was made on obtain at his expense a the 6th of March 1828. own sepreport arate rep In the year 1855, Mr. Harvey made an application to his Honor in respect to his claims, but the Master of the Rolls, for liberty to come in and prove on foot reserving to the persons of his judgment, alleging that the omission to prove his judgment at who had pro ved in the the proper time was owing to some fatality. cause a right to rely on the That application came before his Honor on the 28th of April decree against his claims. The 1855, when the following order was made :-"Let the defendant Master found that his incum- William Harvey be at liberty to come in before the Master in this brance was subject to the cause, and file a charge on foot of the judgment mentioned in the rights and pri- ' orities estab- said defendants affirmation, and obtain a separate report at his own lisped by the expense, under the decree to account in this cause ; and the said decree of 1828. Held, that on Anthony Nugent, the assignee of Patrick Murphy, insisting that the true con struction of the Mr. William Harvey was a party to this suit, and filed an answer, order of 1855, the Master was and is bound by the proceedings, and concluded by the said report right in so find- ing. and decrees, and cannot claim in priority to any of the parties Quehe re, whe- the order reported and decreed, this order to be without prejudice to the ther of 1855 was several other parties who have proved in this cause insisting that right in per mitting H. to their claims and priorities are established by the decree and report file a charge, in respect of a claim omitted in a decree to which he was a party ? CHANCERY REPORTS. 431 of 1828 ; and let Mr. Harvey pay to the said Anthony Nugent the costs of this motion." The Master in the cause, by his report dated the 27th...