The Estate of James Stanfield, Owner; James Mark, Petitioner

JurisdictionIreland
Judgment Date09 July 1877
Date09 July 1877
CourtIncumbered Estates Court (Ireland)

L. E. Court.

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JAMES STANFIELD,
OWNER;
JAMES MARK,
PETITIONER.

In re Johnstone's Estate 7 Ir. Jur. (N. S.) 36.

In re The Estate of the Assignees of Bunbury 3 "Irish Law Times," 741.

In re Grier's Estate Ir. R. 6 Eq. 1.

Practice — Jurisdiction — Time whithin which an order may be reviewed —

VOL. XI.1 EQUITY mum. 537 recover possession of the lands is by an ejectment at law ; and I Bolls. must dismiss the bill. The costs of course must follow. 1877. Solicitor for the Plaintiff : Mr. Charles Thorp. Solicitor for the Defendant Sarah Watson : Mr. John Watson. Solicitor for the Defendants R. L. and C. M. Watson : Mr. Sutton. WATSON V. WATSON. IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE of JAMES STAN-FIELD, L. E. Court. OWNER ; JAWS MARK, PETITIONER. 1877. Practice-Turisdiction-Time within which. an order may be reviewed-The Landed Estates Court Act 1858 (21 4- 22 Viet. c 72), ss. 39 4- 41. Sections 39 and 41 of the Landed Estates Court Act 1858 (21 & 22 Viet. a. 72) not being in pari materid, the time within which, under s. 39, " it shall be lawful for the Court to review and rescind or vary any order which shall have been previously made by it" is not limited to the " three months " within which, under s. 41, an " appeal must be entered," but is entirely in the discretion of the Judge. ON the 26th of June, 1876, there having been filed. 'by the Petitioner in this matter an objection which raised questions of priority in respect of demands of certain persons on the final schedule of incumbranees, amongst others, the executors of one James Dodds and David Martin, who under agreements had entered into possession of lands of the Owner, an order was made by Judge FLANAGAN disposing of the questions of priÂÂÂÂority then before him, and incidentally directing that, in the taking of the accounts in the Examiner's office, certain persons, amongst others the executors of James Dodds and David Martin, were to be charged as mortgagees in possession. Accordingly the accounts were taken in the Examiner's office on that basis ; and only a small sum of money was ascertained to be due to and was paid to the executors of James Dodds. Subsequently it was discovered that the residue of the funds in Court was more considerable than had been anticipated; and there was filed by one Patrick M'Elroy an objection which raised a ques 538 THE IRISH REPORTS. [I. It L. E. Court. tion on the construction of one of the above-mentioned agreements ; 1877. and, that question having been fully argued and maturely con...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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