Martin v Cotter

CourtCourt of Chancery (Ireland)
Judgment Date29 April 1846
Date29 April 1846



Fordyce v. Forde 4 Br. Ch. C. 495.

Vincent v. GoingENR Fl. & Kel. 250.

Halt v. Smith 14 Ves. 425.

Barraud v. ArcherENR 2 Sim. 433.

Bessonet . RobinsENR Sau. & Sc. 142.

Martin v. CotterUNK 7 Ir. Eq. Rep. 176.

Drew v. Corp 9 Ves. 368.

Drew v. Hanson 6 Ves. 675.

Oldfield v. Round 5 Ves. 508.

Hall v. Smith 14 Ves. 426.

Lyddall v. WestonENR 2 Atk. 19.

CASES IN EQUITY. 351 1846. Chancery. MARTIN v. COTTER. This case came before the Court on exceptions to the Master's report of bad title. The sale was made in a creditor's suit. The points discussed arose as follows : Sir J. L. Cotter being a banker, in 1809, pursuant to the Banker's Act, conveyed to trustees the manor of Cottersborough, including amongst others the lands of Minoss. In 1812 the trustees sold the lands of Minoss to the debtor, for whose incumbrances they were now sold. The conveyance granted the lands, "saving and reserving out of the conveyance hereby made the manorial rights belonging or appertaining to the manor of Cottersborough otherwise Ballymagooly, of which manor the lands hereby released and confirmed are part and parcel, and the tolls and duties of the fairs and markets thereof, and also any liberty of turbary. or limestone heretofore granted therein or thereout by the said Sir J. L. Cotter or his ancestors to any of the tenants of the said manor, as expressed in their leases respectively." The covenant for quiet enjoyment was also made subject to the aforesaid tenants' leases, and any liberties of limestone or turbary theretofore granted therein by the said Sir J. L. Cotter or his ancesÂÂtors or any of them to the tenants of the said manor. No right to cut turf or quarry limestone such as that reserved had been exercised since 1809 ; and there were affidavits that there was no turf bog or open quarry on the lands. Leases had, however, been made by Sir J. L. Cotter, granting the tenants the liberty to dig turf and limestone ; one of them dated in 1791 was produced and conÂÂtained this covenant, "the said Sir J. L. Cotter doth for him, &c., promise liberty to the said (lessees) their heirs, &c., to. quarry and carry off turf from such parts of the said Sir J. L. Cotter's estate as he the said Sir J. L. Cotter, his heirs or assigns, shall from time to time during said demise appoint, for the consumption and improvement of the said demised premises, and for' no other use whatever." The lands were set up as held for a clear and inde• feasible title in fee-simple. This reservation of the manorial rights and the right to cut turf and quarry was the first ground on which the Master reported the title bad. for discharging the purchaser. A delay of seven months Held no waiver of an objectionito,tbe title which turned upon a question of fact. Appeal from Martin v. Cotter, ante p. 44. Observations on clearing a title by showing the non-existence of rights under a reservation or onerous covenant not stated; and on the duty of being careful and exÂÂplicit in preparing for a sale. 352 CASES IN EQUITY. . 1846. In the rental, eighty-six acres of the lands were mentioned as Chancery. being held by D. and P. Mahony, and were described thus :-" Term MARTIN for which demised-Under an article of agreement for lease for four v. lives, bearing date 1804, and one year." The three words in COTTER. were written ; the remainder of the description was printed. It Statement. appeared that the Mahonys had held. under a lease dated in 1784 for four lives and one year, which expired in 1843, the last life having died in 1842. The article of 1804 was an agreement for a lease for four lives and a year in reversion expectant on that interest, j The Master accordingly found that these tenants were entitled to four lives and a year from 1843, and that the rental misdescribed their holding ; and this was the second ground on which he reported the title bad. Affidavits were since filed, stating that the purchaser had been deceived by the statement in the rental, and that if he had known the term for which the Mahonys...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Reynolds v Reynolds
    • Ireland
    • Rolls Court (Ireland)
    • April 27, 1848
    ...533. Earl of Derby v. TaylorENR 1 East, 502. Whittick v. JohnstonENR Gow. 173. Lennon v. Napper 2 Sch. & Lef. 685. Martin v. CotterUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351. Right v. BawdenENR 3 East, 260. Smith v. PackhurstENR 3 Atk. 135. Palmer's caseUNK 4 Rep. 74. Goodtitle v. Gibbs 5 B. & Cr. 79. Whittick......
  • Stewart v The Marquis of Conyngham
    • Ireland
    • Rolls Court (Ireland)
    • April 16, 1851
    ...STEWART and THE MARQUIS OF CONYNGHAM. Martin v. CotterUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351. Burnell v. BrownENR 1 Jac. & W. 168. Seaman v. Vawdrey 16 Ves. 390. Barton v. Lord Downes Fl. & K. 505. Larkin v. Lord RosseUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 70. Lyddal v. WestonENR 2 Atk. 19. Pope v. Garland 4 Y. & Col. Exch. ......
  • Vignolles v Bowen
    • Ireland
    • Rolls Court (Ireland)
    • November 19, 1847
    ...Vawdry 16 Ves. 390. Waring v. Hoggart Ry. & M. 39. Bessonet v. RobinsENR Sau. & Sc. 142. Hall v. Smith 14 Ves. 426. Martin v. CotterUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351. Spunner v. WalshUNK Since reported, 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 386. Herring v. Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's 2 Wils. Ch. R. 11. Barrwud v. Archer......
  • Vaughan v Magill
    • Ireland
    • Court of Chancery (Ireland)
    • February 19, 1849
    ...Ry. & Moo. 39. Barton v. Lord Downes Fl.& K. 505. Dykes v. BlakeENR 4 Bing. N. C. 463; S. C. 6 Scott, 320. Martin v. CotterUNKENR 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351; 8 ibid, 147; S. C. 3 Jo. & Lat. 496. Hall v. Smith 14 Ves. 426. Walter v. MaundeENR 1 Jac. & W. 181. Jones v. SmithENRENR 1 Hare, 43; S. C. 1......
  • 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