REVERSION. " Reversion of land ie a certain estate remaining in the lessor or donor, after the particular estate and possession cons-eyed to another by lease for life, for years, or gift in tail. And it is called a reversion in respect of the possession separated from it ; so that ho that bath the one, bath not the other at the same time, for being in one body together, there cannot be said a reversion, because by the uniting. the one of them is drowned in the other. And so the reversion of land is the land itself when it falleth." (` Termee do la Ley?) Thus if a man seised in fee simple conveys lands to A fur life, or in tail, ho retains the reversion in fee simple. The distinction between a remainder and a reversion has been explained in REMAINDER. In all cases where the owner of land or the person who has an estate in land, grants part only of his estate, he has a reversion ; and as the grantee holds of him, there is tenure between them, and the grantor has a scignory by virtue of having a reversion. When a man grants all his estate to another, or grants a particular estate to A, and various remainders over, remainder to F in fee, ho has no reversion left, and therefore he Ilea no seignory since the passing of the statute of Quia Emptortsi. The remainder-men also who precede the remainder-man in fee, do not hold of such remainder-man, but of the lord of the fee of whom the original owner held. The word reversion is often used inaccurately, and It is sometimes necessary to recur to its strict legal signification.
Before the passing of the statute De Denim, if a man seised in fee simple granted his lands to a man and the heirs of his body, he had no reversion, for the grantee was considered to have a conditional fee. But since this statute, all estate to a man and the heirs of his body has always been considered to be a particular estate.
If a man grants a lease of lands in possession, at common law, ho has no reversion until the lessee enters by virtue of his lease, for the lessee has no estate until ho enters ; but if the term of years is created under the Statute of Uses, as by bargain and sale, the lessee has a vested estate by virtue of the statute, without entering on the land, and consequently the lessor has a reversion. It is said that a reversion cannot be !created by deed or other assurance, but arises from con struction of law. This means that a reversion is not created by the
act of the lnrty who conveys part of his estate, hut is a legal conse quence of his acts. If a man seised in fee simple limits his estate to another for life or in tail, remainder to himself in fee or to his own right heirs, he has not a remainder, but a reversion. Yet by 3 and 4 W m. IV. 0. 106, the effect of such a limitation is to vest such a remainder in fee in the settler by- purchase, and he is not to be con sidered to be entitled to it as his former estate or part thereof.
A reversion is a vested estate, which may be granted or conveyed, and charged like an estate in possession; and in seine cases the reversioner in fee may bring an action, as well as the tenant in possession, for an injury to his inheritance.
Fealty is an lasepareble incident to a reversion. There may or may not be a rent reserved. but fealty is always due from the owner of the particular estate to the reversioner, and it cannot be separated from the nre elision, though the rent, if there be one reserved, may be separated from it. [Retell Reversions which are expectant on estates for years are subject to dower and courtesy; but this is not the case with reversions expectant on a freehold estate.
When a reversion expectant on an estate tail comes into possession, it is liable to the lessee made by those who were at any time entitled to the reversion, and to the covenants contained in such leases. All particular estates, except an estate tail, are subject to merge in the reversion, when the particular estate and the reversion are united in the same person. Formerly when an estate tail was converted into a base fee, and the remainder or reversion in fee in the same lands became united in the saute pers. n. the base fee was subject to merger in the reveraion : but by the 3 and 4 Wm. IV. c. 74, when such union takes plaee, " the base fee shall not merge, but shall be ipso facto enlarged into AS large an estate as the tenant in tail, with the consent of the protector, if any, might have created by any disposition under this Ad, if each remainder or reversion had been vested in any other Larson.' Before this statute, when a base fee thus merged in the reversion, the reversion became an estate in possession, and liable to all the leases and charges of those who had at any time been entitled to it.