Premises known as the Red Lion Inn, Grasmere and certain outbuildings were let. In February 1852, Walker allowed one Usher, who owned the Red Lion Inn, to build a shed on his (Walker’s) adjoining land in return for a rent of 1s. a year. In November 1852, Usher demised the Red Lion Inn to Hodson and the lease included the shed. In 1870 Walker brought proceedings against Usher for possession of the shed. He obtained judgment and a warrant was issued to the bailiff who recovered possession on Walker’s behalf. Hodson, who thereby lost possession, brought proceedings for trespass. At trial Martin B ruled that Hodson had no cause of action on the basis that the order of the County Court bound him as well as Usher. Application was made to the Court of Exchequer Chamber to discharge the rule.
Held: Pigott B: the statutory provisions giving the County Court power to make an order for possession did not bind persons who were not party to the proceedings and that accordingly the rule had to be discharged. It was arguable that Hodson could bring an action in trespass where the superior landlord had obtained judgment against the intermediate tenant. He must have accepted that Hodson was not bound by the judgment against Usher because, if he had been, that would have been a complete answer to his claim in trespass. Channell B, approving Doe v Earl of Derby: A verdict which is evidence against A is not admissible against B on the ground that B claims under A unless B acquired his interest from A’s title subsequent to the verdict. The rule made by Martin B at trial had to be discharged. He came to the same conclusion as Pigott B on the question of statutory interpretation. Martin B, sitting on the application to discharge the rule he had himself made: Dissented on the question of statutory construction. He did not refer to the question of estoppel per red judicatam. Estoppel per rem judicatam cannot bind a person who claims under the person against whom a judgment was obtained, unless he obtained his interest from that person after the judgment was given.
Judges:
Channell B, Martin B, Piggott B
Citations:
(1872) LR 7 Exch 55
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Approved – Doe v The Earl of Derby 1834
For a plea of res judicata to arise as between claimants to the title to goods, the same title must have come into question in both actions, because there must be an identity of interest between the party to the first action and the party to the . .
Cited by:
Cited – Wiltshire v Powell and others CA 7-May-2004
The claimant sought a declaration as to the ownership of an aircraft. Saying he had bought it in good faith from E H and S, who in turn similarly claimed to have bought it from Ebbs. The defendant had obtained a judgment that he was owner as against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Litigation Practice
Updated: 16 May 2022; Ref: scu.198729