Jessel MR said: ‘What is the effect of such a covenant in equity? It has been said that the effect in equity of the covenant of the wife, as far as she is concerned, is that it does not affect her personally, but that it binds the property: that is to say, it binds the property under the doctrine of equity that that is to be considered as done what ought to be done. That is in the nature of specific performance of the contract no doubt. If, therefore, this is a covenant to settle the future-acquired property of the wife, and nothing more is done by her, the covenant will bind the property’.’ and
‘The settlement is one which I cannot help thinking was never intended by the framer of it to have the effect I am going to attribute to it; but, of course, as I very often say, one must consider the meaning of the words used, not what one may guess to be the intention of the parties.’ and ‘It is a cardinal principle of construction of the terms of contracts that the meaning of a document or a particular part of a document is to be sought in the document itself: ‘one must consider the meaning of the words used, not what one may guess to be the intention of the parties”.
Judges:
Jessel MR
Citations:
(1881) 18 Ch D 531
Cited by:
Cited – Pullan v Coe ChD 1913
A marriage settlement settled property on the husband, wife, and prospective children. The wife also promised to settle after-acquired property on the same trusts. She later received andpound;285 which she invested in part in bearer bonds which . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Trusts, Contract
Updated: 15 May 2022; Ref: scu.471502