Lord Westmeath v Hogg

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date19 November 1840
Date19 November 1840
CourtCourt of Common Pleas (Ireland)

COMMON PLEAS.

Lord WESTMEATH
and

HOGG.

Parker v. Plumer Cro. Eliz. 190.

The King v. The Inhabitants of Old AlresfordENR 1 T. R. 358.

Doe d. Dingley v. SalesENR 1 M. & S. 298.

Close v. Brady Jon. & Car. 186.

Doe d. Hanley v. WoodENR 2 B. & Al. 724.

Pitt v. LamingENR 4 Camp. 73.

Crusoe v. Bugby 3 Wils. 234.

Doe d. Pitt v. HoggHRC 4 D. & R. 226.

Greenslade v. TapscottENR 1 C. M. & R. 55.

Webb v. Paternoster Palmer Rep. 74.

Crosbie v. WadsworthENR 6 East, 603.

CONENANT — CON-ACRE — SUBLETTING — SETTING ASIDE VERDICT.

MICHAELMAS TEAM, THIRD VICTORIA. 27 Thursday, November 19th. CONENANT-CON-ACRE-SUBLETTING-SETTING ASIDE VERDICT. Lord WESTMEATH v. HOGG. MR. WHITE shewed cause against the conditional order of the 5th of Where the fol- lowing proviso November; "that the verdict obtained by the plaintiff in this cause, at was contained " the last Summer Assizes, should be set aside, and a verdict entered in a lease on which £170. Ss. "for the defendant, pursuant to leave reserved by the Judge before 2d ed . as was the resery year- - " whom the trial was had." This was an action for a breach of cove- ly rent, " ProÂnant, brought by a lessor against his lessee, and three breaches were " vided, &c., " that as long averred, two of which were abandoned at the trial, and the third alone was " as the said relied on. That breach alleged non-payment of three years' rent, due and "H. H., his heirs, &c., ending November 1st, 1838. The rent reserved by the lease (which "shall conti- occu- bore date May 1, 1821, and was for three lives and twenty-one years), " nue to py the lands was £170. 5s. 2d., but the terms of the following proviso in it, went " and Pre-the mises &c. to exonerate the defendant from one-half of that rent :---"Provided "without per- " always, and it is the true intent and meaning of these presents, that " mutingting " " as long as the said Henry Hogg shall continue to occupy the lands " of "erection oany other " and premises, with the appurtenances, hereinbefore demised, without "house than " that and the "permitting the erection of any other house than that, and the office "offices there- "unto belong- "thereunto belonging, in which the said Henry Hogg, his heirs or i4 ing, iu which "assigns, shall, himself or themselves bond fide reside, or dwell, or live "the said H. " H., his "in, without letting, setting, alienating, or assigning, or otherwise "heirs, &c. "disposing of all or any part of the lands and premises, and appurte- "shall, - shall, him " self or themÂ" names, hereby demised, unless by consent in writing under the seal "selves, bond fiese, " and title of honor of George Earl of Westmeath, his heirs, &c., for "without let- " alienation in any manner as aforesaid ; that then the said Henry Hogg, " Wig, setting, " alienating, "his heirs, &c., shall only yield and pay unto the said George Earl of " assigning, or ise " Westmeath, his heirs, &c., the sum of £85. 2s. 7d. sterling yearly, in "otherw disposing of " time and manner as aforesaid." The evidence produced at the trial was " all or any " part of considered by the Judge to be sufficient evidence of a subletting, and he " lands and desired the jury to find for the plaintiff on the third breach, on the "premises, " c, unless ground of a setting in con-acre-con-acre, as appeared by the evidence, "by consent in being a giving of land to another person to manure, till, and take a crop " wr der ititheg, seal, out of it. It is contended by the defendant, that a setting of this kind "&c. of G., " Earl of is not a breach of the proviso ; and if it should be so held by the Court, " his heirs,&c. "for alienation "in any manner as aforesaid, that then the said H. H., his heirs, &c., shall only pay to " G. Earl of W., his heirs, &c., the sum of £85. 2s. 7d. yearly, in time and manner "aforesaid." Held, that a letting in con-acre was not a letting within the contemplaÂtion of the said proviso, so as to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Browne v Marquis of Sligo
    • Ireland
    • High Court of Chancery (Ireland)
    • 1 décembre 1859
    ...S. 276. Rex v. BardwellENR 2 B. & C. 161. Hughes v. Overseers of ChathamUNK 5 M. & G. 54. Rex v. Snape 6 A. & E. 278. Westmeath v. Hogg 3 Ir. Law Rep. 27. Parker v. TaswellENR 2 De G. & J. 559. Pain v. CombesENR 1 De G. & J. 34. Calverly v. Williams 1 Ves. jun. 201. Clowes v. Higginson 1 Ve......
  • Booth v M'Manus
    • Ireland
    • Exchequer (Ireland)
    • 8 juin 1861
    ...B., and FITZGERALD and DEASY, BB. BOOTH and M'MANUS. Close v. Brady Jon. & C. 186. Mayhew v. Suttle 4 Ell. & Bl. 347. Westmeath v. Hogg 3 Ir. Law Rep. 27. Dease v. O'Reilly 8 Ir. Law Rep. 52. Mulligan v. Adams Ibid, 132. Pitt v. LamingENR 4 Camp. 73. Pitt v. Hogg 4 Dowl. & Ry. 226. Greensla......
  • Dease, Executor of Matthew O'Reilly, v William O'Reilly
    • Ireland
    • Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 28 janvier 1845
    ...Bench. DEASE, Executor of MATTHEW O'REILLY, and WILLIAM O'REILLY. Lord Westmeath v. Hogg 3 Ir. Law Rep. 27. Ex parte SmythENR 1 Swans. 338, note. Ex parte SmythENR 3 Hare, 173. Brown v. AmyotENR 2 Taunt. 148. Hegan v. JohnsonENR 3 Bing. 361. Knight v. BenettENR 5 Bing. 185. Cox v. Bent 5 Ir......
  • Thomas Jones, Lessee of Lord Ashtown v James White and Richard White
    • Ireland
    • Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 11 novembre 1847
    ...WHITE. Hume v. Kent 1 B. & Bea. 554. Bonafous v. RybotENR 3 Burr. 1374. Davis v. Jackson 1 Ir. Cir. c. 184. Lord Westmeath v. Hogg 3 Ir. Law Rep. 27. Lessee Bowen v. Cleary 10 Ir. Law Rep. 449. Davis v. Jackson Ir. Cir. Rep. 384. 400 CASES AT LAW. M. T. 1847. Queei faelsols. THOMAS. JONES; ......

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