Re Baldwin's Estate
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Ross, J. |
| Judgment Date | 21 July 1899 |
| Court | Chancery Division (Ireland) |
| Date | 21 July 1899 |
Chancery Division
Ross, J.
Bank of New South Wales v. O'ConnorELR 14 App. Cas. 273.
Barnes v. Racster 1 Y. & C.C. C. 401.
Crosse v. General Reversionary and Investment Co.ENR 3 De G., M. & G. 698.
Cutfield v. RichardsENR 26 Beav. 241.
Hepworth v. HeslopENR 3 Hare, 485.
National Provincial Bank of England v. GamesELR 31 Ch. D. 582.
Parker v. WatkinsENR Johns. 133.
Wild v. LockhartENR 10 Beav. 320.
Wonham v. MachinELR L. R. 10 Eq. 447.
Mortgage — Priority of costs of enforcing mortgagee's claim.
Voi..I.] CHANCERY DIVISION. 15 IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE of WILLIAM HENRY Ross, T. BIGGS BALDWIN, OWNER ; Ex PARTE THOMAS 1899. WILLIAM WRIGHT, PETITIONER. July 18, 21. Mortgage—Priority of costs of enforcing mortgagee's claim. The costs incurred by a person e.ntitled to an annuity and charge on an estate in successfully enforcing his claim against the owner, who resisted it, take the same rank as the principal sum. OBJECTION of Henry Thomas Wright to the final schedule of incumbrances, claiming that his mortgage, dated 3rd October, 1881, placed No. 13 on the schedule, should be placed in priority to incumbrance No. 12 on the schedule, being a statutory mortÂgage, dated the 17th May, 1890, for £169 Os. 9d., the amount of the taxed costs of an action brought by Benjamin Little against the owner. The facts appear fully in the judgment. Moriarty, for the objector. Morgan Byrne, for the incumbrancer, having carriage. The following authorities were cited :—Barnes v. Racster (1), Hepworth v. Heslop (2), Wild v. Lockhart (3), Outfield v. Richards (4), Crosse v. General Reversionary and Investment Co. (5), Wonharn v. Machin (6), Parker v. Watkins (7), Bank of New South Wales v. O'Connor (8), National Provincial Bank of England v. Games (9). Daniel's Chancery Practice (1884 ,edition), p. 1181; Fisher on Mortgages (1897 edition), p. 880; Morgan and Davy on Costs, p. 236. (1) 1 Y. & C. C. C. 401. (2) 3 Hare, 485. (3) 10 Beay. 320. (4) 26 Beay. 241. (5) 3 De G., M. & G. 698. (6) L. R. 10 Eq. 447. (7) Johns. 133. (8) 14 App. Cas. 273. (9) 31 Ch. D. 582. THE IRISH REPORTS. [1900. Ross, S. :— This is a conflict of priorities between the costs of a chargeant in establishing his right to certain charges, and a puisne mortÂgagee. The law is as follows :—Where a mortgagee or chargeant is set at defiance by the mortgagor or owner of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Red Sail Frozen Foods Ltd ((in Receivership))Red Sail Kilmore Ltd ((in Receivership)) and Red Sail Exports Ltd ((in Receivership)) Tom Grace
...PROPERTY ACT 1925 S109(8) MIRROR GROUP NEWSPAPERS PLC v MAXWELL 1998 BCLC 638 COTTERELL v STRATTON LR 8 CH APP 295 BALDWINS ESTATE, IN RE 1900 1 IR 15 COMPANY LAW Receiver Remuneration - Costs of receivership - Whether receiver entitled to be paid more than 5% of gross amount of monies rece......
-
Parker-Tweedale v Dunbar Bank Plc (No. 2)
...in the judgment of Tindal C.J. in Doe d. Holt v. Roe (1830) 6 Bing. 447. Its existence was recognised in Ireland in Re: Baldwin's Estate (1900) 1 I.R. 15, at page 16, per Ross J. It was implicitly approved by Romer L.J. in Re: Leighton's Conveyance [1937] Ch., 154: "Where a mortgagee's titl......
-
Sheehan v Breccia and Others
...that the third proposition, which he characterised as an exception to the general rule, was recognised in Ireland in Re Baldwin's Estate [1900] 1 I.R. 15. However, on the basis of what the court has been told of the nature of the proceedings, and insofar as it is relevant, I do not consider......