registering such document, if the purchaser require it registered, shall be borne by him, and that the expense of stamping deeds (if any) unstamped or insufficiently stamped, which a purchaser shall require to be stamped, shall also be borne by him. It is assumed, however, it should not be provided that a document unstamped or insufficiently stamped shall not be stamped, as such a provision might be held to be a contract prejudicial to the revenue, and as such not enforceable (p).

SECTION 11.

Outstanding Estate-Covenants—Allotments, &c. The contract frequently provides that every assurance and act which may be required by the purchaser for getting in, surrendering or releasing any outstanding estate, or for completing the vendor's title, shall be prepared at the expense of the purchaser.

In the absence of such a stipulation, outstanding estates and incumbrances must be got in at the vendor's expense, by deeds distinct from the conveyance, or the purchaser may require the vendor to bear the increased expense of the purchase deed by reason of the concurrence of trustees and incumbrancers therein (g). But such expense would not be thrown upon the vendor if the incumbrances be kept on foot for the purchaser's protection (r).

(p) Smith v. Mawhood, 14 M. & W. 452; Nixon v. Albion Marine Insurance Co., 2 L. R., Ex. 338. See also Whiting and

Loomes, 14 L. R., Ch. D. 822.
(q) Reeves v. Gill, 1 Beav. 375.
(r) Dart, V. & P. 504; Cooper
v. Cartwright, Johns, 679.

In a case where, after contract signed, the vendor died, having devised the legal estate to an infant, it was held that his estate must bear the expense of a suit thus rendered necessary, but it was otherwise if he died intestate, leaving an infant heir (s). The Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, s. 4, sub-s. 1, provides as to persons dying after the 31st December, 1881, that where, upon the death of any person, there is subsisting a contract enforceable against his heir or devisee for sale of a fee simple or freehold interest descendible to his heirs general in any land, his personal representatives shall have power to convey such land for all the estate and interest vested in him at his death in any manner proper for giving effect to the contract.

It is also usual to provide that it shall be assumed that every owner of the property included in the contract, whose widow (if any) would have been entitled to dower, and is not mentioned in the title, did not leave a widow.

In sales by fiduciary vendors, it is not unusual to insert a special condition that the vendors will covenant only against incumbrances (t); though the absence of such a condition would not, it is assumed, render such vendors liable to enter into any other covenants.

When property subject to a lease at an entire rent is sold in lots, or a portion thereof only is sold, provision should be made by the contract for the apportionment

(s) Purser v. Darby, 4 Kay & J. 41; Barker v. Venables, 11

Jur. 480.

(t) Dart, V. & P. 172.

of the rent, and if the tenant's concurrence in the apportionment cannot be obtained, the purchaser should be precluded from taking any objection on that account (u).

If a deed has been executed, or a surrender of copyholds made, by attorney, the power must be produced, and it must be shown that the principal was alive when it was acted upon; and where the power is not given for a valuable consideration it should be shown that it was not revoked prior to its apparent exercise (v); but as to acts made and done since the 31st December, 1881, under powers of attorney, it is provided by section 47 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, that 'Any person making or doing any payment or act, in good faith, in pursuance of a power of attorney, shall not be liable in respect of the payment or act by reason that before the payment or act the donor of the power had died or become lunatic, of unsound mind, or bankrupt, or had revoked the power, if the fact of death, lunacy, unsoundness of mind, bankruptcy, or revocation was not at the time of the payment or act known to the person making or doing the same."

When the property sold consists of an allotment under an inclosure award, or an allotment taken in exchange, it is usual to stipulate that the purchaser shall not be entitled to call for production of the title to the property in respect of which the allotment was made.

(u) Prid. Con., tit. "Conditions

of Sale."

(2) Dart, V. & P. 311.

In the case of enfranchised copyholds it was usual to provide that the purchaser should not call for production of the manorial title unless the enfranchisement had been effected under the copyhold acts (w), but now the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, s. 3, sub-s. 2, provides that where land of copyhold or customary tenure has been converted into freehold by enfranchisement, then, under a contract to sell and convey the freehold the purchaser shall not call for the title to make the enfranchisement.

Should a trust deed for the benefit of creditors, registered under the bankruptcy acts, be on the title, it is usual to provide by the contract that the vendor shall not be required to furnish any evidence beyond the certificate of registration, of the validity of such deed.

SECTION 12.
Leaseholds.

Until recently, if it were requisite to negative a purchaser's right on a sale of leaseholds to call for the lessor's title as well as the title to the lease, the contract should have stipulated accordingly (x); but a condition that the vendor should not be required to produce the lessor's title, did not prevent the purchaser from himself investigating it, and objecting on the ground of defects which he might so discover (y).

(w) Kerr v. Pawson, 25 Beav. 394.

(x) Hume v. Bentley, 5 De G. & Sm. 520.

(y) Shepherd v. Keatley, 3 L. J. (N. S.) Ex. 288; see also Waddell v. Wolfe, 9 Q. B. 515.

On a sale by auction of leaseholds it is usual to state upon the particulars and conditions that the lease will be produced at the sale and that it may be inspected previously, and stipulate that the purchaser shall be deemed to purchase with full notice of its contents and the condition of the premises as regards repairs and all other matters, and in the absence of such a stipulation a purchaser would still be deemed to have notice; but the contract must not contain misrepresentations or omissions (y). It is also usual to stipulate in a contract for sale of leaseholds, that the production of the receipt for the last payment of rent accrued under the lease previously to the date fixed for completion shall be accepted as conclusive evidence of all the covenants and conditions in the lease having been performed up to the time of completion, or that breaches (if any) have been waived.

And if, as is very frequently the case, the person to whom the rent is paid is not the person who granted the lease, then that the person giving such receipt shall be deemed to be the person entitled to the reserved rent without evidence other than the receipt of the devolution of the property.

The Conveyancing and Law of Property Act, 1881, s. 3, sub-ss. 4 and 5, provides that, on production of a receipt for the last payment of rent due before completion of the purchase, it shall be assumed, unless the contrary appears, that all the covenants and provisions under the lease or underlease sold have been (y) Weston v. Savage, 10 L. R., Ch. D. 736; Jones v. Rimmer, ib. 14, 588.