References: [1368] [Co. Litt. 53a]
Ratio: The prior of the Hospital of St John brought a writ of waste against one J and alleged that he had committed waste in certain tenements which he held for the term of his life by the lease of his predecessor, namely in respect of a chamber, a bakehouse, a grange and other buildings to the disinheritance of the said house and hospital.
Belknap. Judgment of the writ for it says ‘to the disinheritance of the said house and hospital’ where the writ ought to say ‘to the disinheritance of the hospital of the said church’ (and this was not allowed)
Belknap. There was no chamber at the time of the making of the lease, as we are ready etc.
Cavendish. That is no issue unless you will say ‘nor at any time since the making of the lease’.
Belknap. There was no chamber at the time of the making of the lease or at any time since, as we are ready etc.
The others to the contrary etc.
As to the bakehouse it was so weak at the time of the making of the lease that it fell
down and he could not prevent this, and so judgment if you can have action for this etc.
C’avendish.It was in good enough repair at the time of the making of the lease and decayed by your default and thus you committed waste, as we are ready etc.
Belknap. As for the grange, this burned down in the time of his predecessor by accident and his predecessor released all action in respect of this and we ask for judgment if action etc. and proffered the deed of his predecessor.
Cavendish. This is a double plea: one is that the grange was burned down by accident; the other is the release of our predecessor. So choose one of these.
Kirkton. I will stick to the deed and so answer the deed.
Cavendish. Sir, you have seen that he has pleaded nothing but the deed of our predecessor which is ineffective other than for his own life and so we ask for judgment and for our damages.
Belknap. We ask for judgment as you have admitted that this is the deed of your predecessor and by this deed he released all kinds of personal actions and this is a personal action and so the action has been extinguished; and so etc.
Cavendish. This is a real action for he will recover free tenement and his predecessor could not release this free tenement except for his own lifetime and since he is dead it seems that this release cannot bar us.
Belknap. His predecessor during his lifetime could have granted to us the right to dismantle the building and sell it and his predecessor would have had no action for this; and since he could have granted this he could for the same reason have released this.
Kirkton. As soon as the waste was done the right to the free tenement accrued to his predecessor and once it had accrued he could not release this free tenement except for his own lifetime without the assent of his convent because it becomes the right of their church as soon as the waste has been committed.
Thorpe. If a disseisin is committed against a man of religion and he release all kinds of personal action his successor will have an action notwithstanding the release.
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case is cited by:
- Cited – Dayani v London Borough of Bromley TCC (Gazette 25-Nov-99, 1996 ORB 1077)
A local authority tenant of properties sub-licensed to homeless persons for three years was liable for having allowed the properties to deteriorate. It was claimed that they were liable for permissive waste as tenants for a fixed period, even though . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 15 March 2019
Ref: 196941
The post 42 E.3. 21: 1368 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.