Page:Halsbury Laws of England v1 1907.pdf/275

 — Part VIII.

Maintenance and Champerty.

53

In the first place, charity may Part Vlli. been recognised by the Courts. Maintenexcuse or justify what would otherwise be maintenance; a man may maintain the suit of his near kinsman, servant, poor ^^^^ neighbour, or poor co-religionist, out of charity, with impunity (^). Ch ampe rty. Where a person thus assists a poor stranger, his action is justified charity, if he has a bond fide belief in the justice of his cause, and it is not necessary that he should have made full inquiry into the matter, Where there so as to have reasonable grounds for such belief {k). is no questiun of poverty, it is doubtful how far the exemption in It has been said to be confined respect of kinship can be extended.

an heir apparent, or the husband of an heiress (/) but in a more recent case brothers, sons-in-law, and brothers-inlaw were apparently regarded as within the exception (m) cousins are apparently without it {n). Secondly, the law permits persons to encourage litigants Commoa where they themselves have, or reasonably believe (o) that they interest, have, a common interest in the result of the action. Thus a remainderman or reversioner may lawfully maintain the tenant in tail or life tenant. So too a landlord may maintain his lessee, if his own title may be prejudiced {})). An equitable interest, or a mere contingency of an interest, is sufficient to justify the maintenance of another in an action concerning the property in question so too is a common interest in a way, churchyard, or common (q), or a common liability to pay tithes either in kind, or subject to a modus, according as the depending suit may result (/•). But the interest must not be merely a sentimental one [s), and it must be an interest in the matters actually in issue in the action, and not merely in matters incidentally connected therewith (^). to a father, a son,







83. " Champerty " (a) is a particular kind of maintenance, Champerty, namely, maintenance of an action in consideration of a promise to See also 1 Hawk. P. 0. (^th ed.) 460 Vin. Abr. and Bac. Abr. (?) 4B1. Com. 134. "Maintenance"; Eotheiuel y. Peiuer {1431), Y. B. 9 Hen. 6, p. 64; Pomer {or Pomeroy) v. Ahhot of Buck fast (1442), Y. B. 21 Hen. 6, p. 15 Harris v. Brisco Charity (1886), n Q. B. D. 504; Findon v. Parker (1843), 11 M. & W. 675. induced by religious sympathy is none the less ohdiVitj {HoldenY Thompson (1901), 23 T. L. E. 529). As to master and servant, see Elhoroiigh v. Ayres (1870), L. E. lOEq. 367.



.

Harris

Brisco, supra, man P. C. (8th ed.) 458. See, however, 2 Eoll. Abr. 115 h, may maintain his blood." (m) BradIau(jhv.N'eiudegate{1883), 11 Q.B.D. l,2verLordCoLEMDGE,C.J., atp. 11. {n) Burke v. Greene (1814), 2 Ball & B. 517. (o) Findon v. Parker, supra ; Hunter v. Daniel (1845), 4 Hare, 420. 1 Hawk. P. C. (8th ed.) 456, 457 A/ahaster v. Harness, 2 Eoll. Abr. 115 g ( v) [1894] 2 Q. B. 897; Payne v. Rogers (1794), 2 Hy. Bl. 349, 3o0. But it must be the (q) 1 Hawk. P. C, supra; Alabaster v. Harmless, supjra. interest felt by a member of a limited class, and not merely by one of the general public {Wallis v. Portland (1797), 3 Yes. 494, 502). (r) Jf indon v. Parker, supra. (s) Bradlaugh v. Neivdeqate, supra. As to common trade interests, see Plating Co. V. Farquharson (1881), 17 Ch. D. 49. (f) Alabaster v. Harness, supra. See also Hutleg v. Hutley (1873), L. E. 8 Q. B. U2, as to " collateral interest." (k)

(0 1

v,

"A

Hawk.





(a) So called from campi partitio, but the doctrine is not confined to actions relating to realty (1 Hawk. P. C. (8th ed.) 463). See p. 41, ante.