Legal Definitions - collatione facta uni post mortem alterius

Collatione facta uni post mortem alterius is a historical legal term from English common law, referring to a specific type of legal order, or "writ." This writ was issued by a court to compel a bishop to appoint a new clergyman to an ecclesiastical office (known as a benefice) when the person originally nominated for that position had died before their appointment could be formally completed. Essentially, it was a legal tool to ensure that a church office did not remain vacant due to the death of a nominee, and that the patron's subsequent nomination was honored.

• Example 1: Imagine a wealthy landowner in 14th-century England, who holds the right to appoint the rector for the local parish church (the "patronage"). The current rector dies, and the landowner nominates a promising young priest, Father Thomas. Before Father Thomas can be formally installed by the bishop, he tragically falls ill and passes away. The landowner then nominates another suitable priest, Father Michael. However, the bishop, perhaps due to administrative oversight or a preference for another candidate, delays Father Michael's appointment. To resolve this, the landowner's legal representatives would seek a writ of collatione facta uni post mortem alterius from the Court of Common Pleas, compelling the bishop to proceed with Father Michael's installation.

  This example illustrates the term by showing a patron's initial nominee dying before appointment, a subsequent nomination, and the need for a legal writ to overcome a bishop's delay in confirming the second appointment.

• Example 2: Consider a situation where a powerful noble family has the right to appoint the vicar of a valuable church living. They nominate their younger son, who is destined for a career in the church. Unfortunately, the son dies unexpectedly after being nominated but before the bishop has completed the formal collation (the act of bestowing the benefice). The family quickly nominates a cousin to take his place. The bishop, however, might be reluctant to appoint the cousin, perhaps because he believes the family is trying to keep the benefice within their control, or because he has his own preferred candidate. In such a scenario, the family would need to petition the Court of Common Pleas for a writ of collatione facta uni post mortem alterius to force the bishop to accept and install their new nominee, ensuring the benefice is filled according to their patronage rights.

  Here, the example demonstrates the term's application when a bishop's reluctance, possibly driven by a desire to exert control or a conflict of interest, necessitates a legal order to uphold the patron's right to nominate a replacement after the initial nominee's death.

• Example 3: Let's envision a scenario where a monastery holds the patronage rights to several parish churches. They nominate a respected monk to fill a vacant rectorship. Before the bishop can officially grant the benefice, the nominated monk dies during a pilgrimage. The monastery then nominates another qualified monk. The bishop, perhaps due to a long-standing rivalry with the monastery or a desire to assert his own authority over appointments, refuses to act on the second nomination. The monastery would then apply to the Court of Common Pleas for a writ of collatione facta uni post mortem alterius. This legal action would serve as a formal demand for the court to intervene and order the bishop to perform his duty, ensuring the monastery's right of patronage is upheld and the parish receives its new spiritual leader without undue delay.

  This example highlights the writ's role in resolving disputes where a bishop's refusal to act on a second nomination, following the death of the first, stems from broader institutional conflicts or a challenge to the patron's authority, requiring judicial intervention to compel the appointment.