The Green Book, Or, Reading Made Easy of the Irish Statutes; Containing an Account of the Principal Reported Decisions at Law and in Equity on the Irish Statutes, Rules, and Orders of Court from Magna Carta to the Present Time (Paperback)

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1862. Excerpt: ... the passing of the statute, was valid against that conveyance, without havuig been redocketted either in twenty years after the entry of the i'udgment or five years after the passing of the act. Sir Edward Sugden ield that the judgment was void as against the mortgagee. He also decided contrary to what Lord Plunket, held in Knox v. Kelly, 1 Dr. and Wal., 532, that the first section of the statute must be confined to purchasers after the act, and does not extend to purchasers whose conveyances were before the act. The decision of Sir Edward Sugden, in Hickson v. Collis, was reversed by Lord Chancellor Brady on a rehearing, who held that the second section of the act only avoids judgments in favour of purchasers, who become such after twenty years from the entry of such judgments, and that it had no relation to purchasers who became such before the passing of the act. The opinion of Brady, L. C., was in accordance with the certificate of Burton, J., and reriin, J., on a case sent to the King's Bench by Sir Edward Sugden, tide Colyer v. Marnall, 10 Law Rep.. 253. This point had been so decided previously by Sir Michael O'Loghlen. And see Carroll v. Darcy, 10 Eq. Rep., 321, before Brady, L. C, after the passing of the 7 & 8 Vict., ch. 90; although notice of a judgment does not deprive a purchaser of the benefit of the Redocketting Act, still, when the language of the purchase deed shows that he purchased subject to the judgment, and gave so much less for the property in consequence of its existence, the purchaser will take subject to the judgment. Garnet v. Armstrong, 4 D. and War, 182; S. C., 5 Eq. Rep., 533. The suing out of an elegit or the appointment of a receiver has not the effect of preventing the operation of the Redocketting Act. Accordingly, in re ...