Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
In a multiplepoinding, raised after N. M.'s death, it was held that the trustees having decided that N. M.'s share ought to be placed under restrictions, were bound by the terms of the settlement to have restricted his right to an alimentary liferent; that the share must be dealt with as if they had done so; and therefore that it fell to be divided equally among the next-of-kin of the testator and widow.
Donald M'Nicol died in the year 1888, leaving a trust-disposition and settlement whereby he conveyed his whole estates to the trustees therein named. After providing Page: 429 ↓
Donald M'Nicol was survived by both his sons, Nicol and John Clark. After his death the trustees named in his settlement entered upon the administration of his estate.
In January 1866 John Clark M'Nicol, the youngest of the testator's sons, came of age, and the trustees subsequently paid over to him his share of his father's succession.
On 18th October 1866 a discharge and ratification was granted by John Clark M'Nicol and Nicol M'Nicol's curator bonis in favour of the trustees.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.