Vaughan v Magill

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 28 April 1848
• Date: 28 April 1848
• Court: Rolls Court (Ireland)

Rolls.

VAUGHAN

and

MAGILL.

White v. BaylorUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 43.

Barton v. Lord Downes Fl. & K. 505.

Martin v. CotterUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351.

Bessonet v. RobinsENR Sau. & Sc. 152.

Marquis of Townsend v. Stangroom 6 Ves. 328.

Warren v. ThunderUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 371.

Smith v. Smith 2 Law Rec. N. S. 157.

Wigg v. WiggENR 1 Atk. 381.

Pope v. GarlandENR 4 Y. & C. Exch. 394.

Spunner v. WalshUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 386.

Vignolles v. Bowen Supra, p 194.

Taylor v. BlacklowENR 3 Bing. N. C. 235.

Ogilvy v. FolgambeENR 3 Mer. 53.

Jones v. SmithENR 1 Hare, 55.

Pope v. Garland Ubi sup.

Bessonet v. RobinsENR Sau. & Sc. 152.

Martin v. CotterUNK 9 Ir. Eq. Rep. 351.

White v. BaylorUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 43.

Pope v. Garland 4 Y. & Col. 401.

Spunner v. WalshUNK 10 Ir. Eq. Rep. 386.

Barton v. Lord Downes F1. & K. 505.

200 CASES IN EQUITY. VAUGHAN v. MAGILL. UNDER the decree for a sale in this cause, the lands of DonoughÂmore, held under a bishop's lease from the see of Armagh, were sold. This lease contained a non-alienation clause and several unusual covenants, including those mentioned in the exceptions hereinafter stated. The lands were subject to an annuity of £100 a-year, vested in the representatives of George Vaughan. The deed by which this was secured was dated the 3rd of April 1830, and contained a subdemise to George Vaughan, the annuitant, for a term less than the term for which the lands were held, by six months, with a toties quoties covenant for renewal, on the usual trusts to secure the annuity. The rental under which the lands were sold described them as the "Estate of the late John Vaughan, Esq., held under his Grace the Archbishop of Armagh ;" and in the observations at the end of the rental it was stated that "the lands of Donoughmore are held under the see of Armagh, by lease for a term of twenty-one years from the 1st day of November 1845." At the close of the rental there was a "recapitulation," which stated the several subdenominaÂtions of land, also the total amount of rent and renewal fines, &c, payable by the sub-tenants, which made the " total annual produce £949. 7s." Then followed the deductions to be made from such " total annual produce," which consisted of head rent and renewal fines payable to the Primate, and some other outgoings, making together £365. 19s. 5d.; and the last deduction to be made out of the " total annual produce" was thus described, " annual rent-charge to the representatives of Mr. George Vaughan deceased, £100." These two sums of £365. 19s. 5d. and the "annual rent-charge payable to the representatives of Mr. George Vaughan CASES IN EQUITY. 201 deceased," were then subtracted from the said "total annual pro- 1848. l s . duce," and left the " net annual profit £483. 7s. 7d." R ol At the sale the lands were purchased by Hill Irvine, and the usual VAUGHAN v. side-bar rule was obtained, referring it to the Master to inquire and MAGILL. report whether a good title had been made to them. The Master, Statement. by his report, found that the purchaser, in the first place, lodged six objections to the title which the Master considered to be good and substantial objections, irrespectively of the question of notice ; and that having considered the notice relied on...