The Sun.
London, England, 1859-01-28 00:00:00

LA TV INTELLIGENCE-(THIS DAY)

COURT OF CHANCERY.

(Before the Lord Chancellor.)

APPEAL.-ESI'IN V. PEMBERTON-JUDGMENT.

This Is an appeal from a decision of Vice-Chancellor Sir
R. T. Kindersley dismissing the plaintiff's bill with costs.
The case was reported in The Sun of yesterday. " The
facts will sufficiently appear from the judgment. The
contention was, whether the defendant was culpably negli-
gent in making the purchase of his property without in-
quiring into the plaintiff's mortage securities over the pro-
perty, and without asking for the production of the title-
deeds of the property, which were in the plaintiff's hands.

The Lord Chancellor, after considering the evidence pro-
dueed, arrived at the conclusion that there was not such
gross negligence on the part of the defendant, in not calling
for production of the title deeds' of the property, as would
entitle him constructively to hold that he had previous
knowledge of the plaintiff's mortgage securities, and that
he purchased the property under that encumbrance. That
would not give him presumptive knowledge of these secu-
rities nor constructive notice of these incumbmnces. And
his lordship, agreeing with the Vice-Chancellor; therefore
dismissed the appeal with costs.

Before Vice-Chancellor Sir ;William Page Wood.)

JTjOGMEN7.-CATTLEY V. ARNOLD.

The question in this case was whether there was a
tenancy for life or a tenancy created year by year and ter-
minable at the end of each year.

His Honour, the Vice-Chancellor, on the authority of the
opinion of Lord Kenyon in the case of Do and Bell, and
the decided cases of Lee and Scolfield, p. 414—the opinion of
Mr. Justice Buller,in Bicknell and Wright—the case of Tom-
fins and Lowins (Carrington and Payne, p. 729)—the case of
Goodley and Wooley (Phillip's reports, p. 522)—the
late case of Chandler, only reported in the Law Journal,
which is exactly similar to the case in 15 Simons. And
the case of Oxenfon and James, 13 Meeson and Welsby,
and the previous case of Herron, 9 Barnwell and Cresswell
considered that there was an accruing interest under the
original contract, and not an annual tenancy and that
accruing interest continued under the original contract and
formed part of the original contract, and could not be held
extinguished or terminable in respect of the notice given,
and that the lease must be held still to subsist.

His Honour directed an inquiry as to how the property
was demised, how it was held, and in what proportions.
' Mr. Daniel, Q.C.-1V hether the tenants'took from year
year, and under what lease their tenancy began?
The Vise-Chancellor—Whether their tenancy began,
and was taken up-and continued under the original contract.
His Honour said—There will be a declaration and an
inquiry to the effect' whether the tenants are entitled to
continue possession in respect to any lands let to the
testator from year to year, or for a longer period, by word,
writing, or in any other manner.
Mr. Daniel, Q.C.---There should be a further direction to
the receiver to keep down the interest of the mortgage, and
that the receiver be directed to pay costs.

The Vice-Chancel for--The costs will be provided for out
of the funds in court.

JUDGMENT.--IN RE THE ATHENNUX SOCIETY:-.Ex PARTE

SHEFFIELD.

The plaintiff disputed his liability as a shareholder in
respect of his shares, on the ground of misrepresentation
and concealment of the true state of the affairs of the com-
pany before he became a shareholder of the company.
His Honour, the Vice-Chancellor, considered that as the
plaintiff had received five years' profits out of the concern,
and also the'dividends without any objection whatever, he
must be held as a shareholder, and liable as a contributor of
the company. He declared accordingly. His Honour said
he could not give costs. The official manager would have
costs of suit, but no other costs.

COURT OF BANKRUPTCY.
(Before' Mr. Commissioner Evans.)
IN RE 'PVGILL.

This bankrupt was described as a builder in Great Coram-
street, and came up for his certificate.
Mr. Bagley, as counsel :for the assignees, said this was a
case of great complicity and difficulty, there being many
disputed accounts to arrange. The assignees had through-
out treated the bankrupt with the •utmost forbearance and
placed considerable confidence in him, which there was no
reason to believe he would abuse. There were several
questions pending, in the adjustment of which the
bankrupt's assistance was required, and it was therefore
proposed that an adjournment should take place.
An adjournment was therefore taken till the sth of May.
Since the bankruptcy in May last, the liabilities have run
off from £21,000 to about £2,094, some of the claims hav-
ing been withdrawn.