atkins case BRANDLYN v ord November the that see Ellice v Boupell Beav moss v  AngloEgyptian navigation company lr Ch Lord Tredegar v windus lr Eq a man who  purchase for a valuable consideration with notice of a voluntary settlement  from a person who buy without notice shall shelterhimself under the first  purchaser see sweet v Southcote bro Charles Rep Lowther v Carlton post vol a  can defend himself in this court as a purchaser for a valuable consideration  under article only see Fitzgerald v Fauconberge Fitzgib heart v Middlehufirst  post vol where defendant plead a former suit they must show it be res P  a  tenant in tail out of possession can bring a bill to perpetuate testimony bill  drop for want of prosecution be never to be plead as a decree of dismission it  be say by Lord chancellor in this cause that a man who purchase for a valuable  consideration with notice of a voluntary settlement from a person who buy  without notice shall shelter himself under the first purchaser yet it must be  the very same interest in every respect he likewise say he never know a man  defend himself in this court as a purchaser for a valuable consideration under  article only if he be injure he must sue at law upon the covenant in the  article his lordship also lie it down as a rule that where the defendant plead  a former suit that the court imply there be no title when they dismiss the  pound be not sufficient they must show it be res P  a a absolute determination  in the court that the plaintiff have no title he also hold that a tenant in  tail out of possession can bring a bill to perpetuate testimony of witness  till he have recover possession by ejectment if he do on the defendant  demurrer for this reason the court will allow it Parry v Roger l vern Philips  v Carew IP W and that a bill drop for want of prosecution be never to be plead  as a decree of dismission in bar to another bill and that a fine levy by  termor for year be a forfeiture but the reversioner have five year after the  expiration of the term to enter the reader be refer to the essay on use and  trust to see also smith v Clifford durn east with respect to a recovery suffer  by a termor for year and a tenant for life