which was doubtful. Held, that
the Court had no jurisdiction to
determine the construction and
effect of the special agreement on
petition. In re Beale. Page 600
20. The costs of taxation depend on
whether one-sixth is taken off the
bill of costs; and to determine
this, a distinction is to be made
between strictly professional
charges and disbursements, and
independent cash payments. Those
payments only which are made in
pursuance of the professional duty
undertaken by the solicitor, and
which he is bound to perform, or
which are sanctioned as profes-
sional payments, by the general
and established custom and prac-
tice of the profession, ought to be
- entered and allowed as professional
disbursements in the bill of costs.
Other disbursements ought to be
included in a separate cash ac-
count. In re Remnant. Page 603
21. In a legal proceeding, A. be-
came liable to pay 60l. This was
paid by B., his solicitor, who had
not acted for A. in the proceeding.
Held that, in a taxation as be-
tween A. and B., the 60l. was not
properly included in B.'s bill of
costs, for the purpose of determin-
ing whether one-sixth had been
taxed off, although it was pro-
perly chargeable as a cash pay-
![[blocks in formation]](https://books.google.no/books/content?id=0lcDAAAAQAAJ&hl=no&output=html_text&pg=PA667&img=1&zoom=3&q=%22during+the+term+of+his+natural+life,+without+impeachment+of+or+for+any+manner+of%22&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U3Gt2Pk1rYw5HrGHQ_RJwROUychkg&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=112,1271,365,175)
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.no/books/content?id=0lcDAAAAQAAJ&hl=no&output=html_text&pg=PA667&img=1&zoom=3&q=%22during+the+term+of+his+natural+life,+without+impeachment+of+or+for+any+manner+of%22&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U3Gt2Pk1rYw5HrGHQ_RJwROUychkg&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=474,465,7,6)
TENANCY BY ENTIRETIES.
1. Bequest to A., his wife and chil-
dren, A. and his wife being to-
gether entitled to one-fourth, A.
insisted that he was entitled to
one-half of such one-fourth in his
own right, and that his wife was
entitled to a settlement in respect
of a moiety only. His wife, how-
ever, claimed a settlement in re-
spect of the whole. Held, that
the fund must be retained, with a
direction to pay the dividends to
the husband during the joint lives,
with liberty for the survivor to
apply. Atcheson v. Atcheson.
Page 485
2. Held also, that if such a legacy
were not brought under the con-
sideration of the court, payment
to the husband would be a good
payment; but in case of no pay-
ment the wife would be entitled
by survivorship.
Ibid.
See HUSBAND AND WIFE.
of charity lands had, by an outlay
of capital, &c., greatly enhanced.
B. were both willing to take a lease See PRODUCTION OF Documents, 6.
at a rent exceeding the value;
but the rent offered by A. B. was
the largest. The Court held, that,
notwithstanding the fair claims of
the old tenant, the benefit to the
charity must be regarded, and
that A. B.'s offer ought to be ac-
cepted, if the excess of the rent
offered by him exceeded the
amount of compensation to which
the tenant was equitably entitled
on being turned out. The Attor-
ney-General v. Gains. Page 63
2. Reference, under the circum-
stances directed, to ascertain whe-
ther any and what compensation
ought to be paid to an outgoing
tenant from year to year for his
outlay of capital on charity lands.
Ibid.
TRADE MARKS.
See INJUNCTION, 1, 2.
Where trustees, under an errone-
ous view of the effect of a will,
pay to parties money to which
they are not entitled, this Court,
in administering the estate, will
compel a restitution and repay-
ment, and will give a lien on the
other interests of such parties un-
der the will, even as against an
assignee for valuable considera-
tion. Dibbs v. Goren. Page 483
See BREACH of Trust.
the deposit, sign you a copy." B. filed a bill for specific performance, and A. did not produce the enclosure. Held, that the two letters constituted a valid contract, intended to be carried into effect by the inclosure; and that, though it did not appear that the inclosure had been approved of, still that this did not affect the prior valid contract. Gibbins v. The Board of Management of the North Eastern Metropolitan Asylum District. Page 1 Where the vendor of land in lots for the purpose of buildings, accompanies his description, particulars, and conditions of sale, with a map delineating the intended divisions of the property by new roads, he must be understood to hold out expectations that the lots will be so divided, and it would not be competent to him to divide the land in a different manner, so as to attract an occupancy and population entirely different from that which would have been produced by acting on the plan proposed and held out at the sale. Peacock v. Penson.
3. A person not a party to the contract ought not to be made party to a suit for specific performance. Ibid. 4. One stipulation in a contract for purchase was that the vendor should make a certain road, which it turned out he could not make without incurring a forfeiture. Held, that the purchaser was entitled to a decree for specific performance
1. An irregular order for taxation
may be waived, but it must be
done in some clear and unequi-
vocal manner. In re Mackrill. 42
On the 21st of July the Master
proceeded ex parte in a taxation
in the absence of the client, who
had not been served with a war-
rant to proceed on that day. A
warrant was afterwards regularly
served for the 31st of July, sub-
scribed "to complete the taxa-
tion." The client did not attend;
but, the Master being informed
of the former irregularity, re-
taxed so much of the bills as had
been taxed on the 21st. Held, that
the client not having attended the
warrant of the 31st, could not
set up the irregularity of the 21st.
In re Mourilyan.
48
See SUPPLEMENTAL BILL, 1,
TAXATION, 2.
1. It is a common rule of construction, that if the words of a gift are of themselves plain, distinct, and capable of having a legal effect, effect must be given to them, notwithstanding any improbability which may arise from looking at the other parts of the will. On the other hand, if the words are ambiguous in expression or effect, they are not to be rejected for uncertainty, but you must collect, if you can, from the other parts of the will, an indication of what the testator meant by those words, which, by themselves, appear to be ambiguous. Wilson v. Eden. 289
2. A party had a power to appoint by will executed without any particular formality. Upon a petition
CONVERSION.
COSTS, 11.
DEVISE.
FORFEITURE, 2.
HUSBAND AND WIFE.
LAPSED LEGACY.
LEGACY.
MORTMAIN.
PER CAPITA.
END OF THE ELEVENTH VOLUME.
|