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 valuing the “expectancy or interest” of substitute-heirs of entail under the 5th section of the Entail Amendment Act 1875 the Court will not take into consideration the chances of the heirs in question succeeding to the estate in fee-simple.
Observations per curiam on the case of Wilson v. De Virte , Dec. 19, 1877, 15 Scot. Law Rep. 239 ; 5 R. 328 .
Major-General A. M. M'Donald on 13th November 1877 presented a petition to the Court under the Acts 11 and 12 Vict. c. 36, 16 and 17 Vict, c. 94, and 38 and 39 Vict. c. 61, for authority to record an instrument of disentail of the estates of Dalchosnie and others, of which he was heir of entail in possession.
The petitioner was born on 22d March 1830, and the three nearest heirs of entail who at the date of the application were entitled to succeed were the petitioner's brother Captain John Alan M'Donald, born March 1834, and his two sisters Misses Elizabeth Moore Menzies M'Donald and Adriana M'Donald, born respectively on 10th June 1827 and 30th November 1828. The only other heir of entail in existence was another sister Miss Jemima M'Donald, born in June 1832.
The petitioner produced a consent to the disentail by Captain M'Donald, but the two next heirs, the Misses M'Donald, refused their consent.
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.