Smith v Peters: ChD 24 Jun 1875

Where an agreement has been entered into for the sale of a house at a fixed price, and of the fixtures and furniture therein at a valuation by a person named by both parties, and he undertakes the valuation, but if refused permission by the vendor to enter the premises for that purpose, the Court will make a mandatory order to compel the vendor to allow the entry to enable the valuation to proceed.
The Court has jurisdiction to make any interlocutory order which is
reasonably asked as ancillary to the administration of justice at the hearing.
Sir George Jessel MR said: ‘I have no hesitation in saying that there is no limit to the practice of the court with regard to interlocutory applications so far as they are necessary and reasonable applications ancillary to the due performance of its functions, namely, the administration of justice at the hearing of the cause.’
Sir George Jessel MR
[1875] UKLawRpEq 126, (1875) LR 20 Eq 511
England and Wales
Cited by:
CitedBayer v Winter CA 1986
Fox LJ said: ‘Bearing in mind we are exercising a jurisdiction which is statutory, and which is expressed in terms of considerable width, it seems to me that the court should not shrink if it is of the opinion that an injunction is necessary for the . .
CitedXX and Others v YY and Others ChD 2-Jul-2021
The first defendant applies for an order that the claimants are not entitled to pursue legal action against his lawyers in respect of funds over which the claimants claim a proprietary interest and paid to the first defendant’s lawyers as legal fees . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Updated: 30 October 2021; Ref: scu.668765