The Common Law Procedure ACT, 1856; The County Courts Procedure ACT, 1856; And the New Rules of Court, with Notes of All Decided Cases Directly Explaining or Otherwise Elucidating the Statutes and Rules

The Common Law Procedure ACT, 1856; The County Courts Procedure ACT, 1856; And the New Rules of Court, with Notes of All Decided Cases Directly Explaining or Otherwise Elucidating the Statutes and Rules : Together with an Appendix

By (author) 

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1858 edition. Excerpt: ...Afterwards by a fiction this remedy was made use of for the recovery of all possessory rights to corporeal hereditaments. Since the fictions of the action were in Upper Canada abolished by 14 & 16 Vic. cap. 114, it will serve no good purpose further to dwell upon them. Our Statute of 1851 was in advance of legislation in England, and effected to some extent what is hero effected to a great extent, viz., the assimilation of ejeetment to other forms of action. The origin of both seems to be the Irish Process and Procedure Act, 13 8: 14 Vic. cap. 18. The Common Law Oommissioners started with the fundamental proposition that " the proceedings in this most important action ought to be simple and speedy." In order thereto they recommended many reforms, each of which is enacted in the following sections. While studying the etfect of these sections, it should be kept in view, that the oflice of ejectment is simply to try title to real estate. The practice of trying titles through the instrumentality of an action trespass qu. cl. fr. has never failed to meet with the pointed disapprobation of the Courts. giw) Taken from Eng. Stat. 15 & 16 e. 6, s. 168.---Founded upon 1st Rep. C. L. Comrs. s. 90. This section is prospective: (Doe d. Smith v. Roc, 8 Ex. 127, 16 L. & Eq. 504.) (2) As under Prov. St. 14 & 15 Vic. c. 114, in lieu of the declaration and notice before then in use. (y) Persons in actual possession are intended. Mere constructive possession where the land is in truth vacant will not suflice: (Doe White v. Roe, 8 Dowl. P. C. 71.) But where a party though removed from oif the premises had left beer in the cellar of a house on the premises, he was considered in actual possession: (Savage v. Dent, 2 Str.1064.) Not...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 394 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 21mm | 703g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236959310
  • 9781236959317