case DESCARLETT against Dennett bill in chancery will not lie to be relieve  against a wilful voluntary breach of covenant or condition Dennett make a  lease to Descarlett the complainant for certain land at Walthamstow in Essex  for nine year render three pound ten shilling ayear with a clause of reentry  for nonpayment of the rend or nonperformance of covenant in which indenture be  a particular covenant that the plaintiff shall not suffer person to make use  of a way over part of the land demise notwithstanding which covenant the  plaintiff put up a gate at the entrance into the close and permit any person  to pass over the way require they to pay for breach of which covenant and for  nonpayment of the rend the lessor bring a ejectment and have judgement he also  bring several other action which seem to carry a appearance of vexation to be  relieve against which judgement in ejectment the lessee bring his bill in this  court offer to pay the rend and satisfy the lessor for the damage in break the  covenant but the bill be dismiss by sir Joseph Jekyll master of the roll for  the court of chancery can relieve the nonperformance of a covenant or  condition the prejudice in breach of which can be estimate by damage this tend  to modern report er p the prejudice of the inheritance inasmuch as it may  hereafter amount to a evidence for a prescription over the close the case of a  entry for nonpayment of rend be very different for there the loss be certain  and may be recompense by damage this have be a settle rule in equity wherefore  the bill be dismiss Mr Lutwyche for the plaintiff argue that it be hard for  his client to lose his lease when he be Willing to make recompense but by the  master of the roll it be owe to his own covenant and to a wilful voluntary  breach thereof against which this court can relieve a that the court of  chancery will not relieve against a covenant where on the performance or  nonperformance of the act to be do or omit the party be to pay a sum by way of  liquidate damage see small v Fitzwilliam Prec Ch uvoodward v Giles vern east  India company v black finch Ponsonby v Adam bro p c Rolfe v Paterson brown p c  low v Peter burr Legard v Hodges brown c c and that the court will relieve  where the penalty be intend mere to secure the enjoyment of a collateral  object see Slowman v walker brown c c Hobson v Trevor Peer wms Parker v Wilson  Mod Chilliner v Chilliner vezey a