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.
Held that the above enactment did not apply to a body of trustees who, though beneficiaries in fee under the testator's settlement, were not entitled to the possession of the property for their own absolute use.
This petition was presented by William M'Creath and others, trustees under “The M'Clymont Trust,” petitioners . The circumstances in which it was brought are sufficiently set forth in the opinion of the Lord Ordinary ( Ashmore ) infra .
Opinion .—“This is a petition by the trustees of ‘The M'Clymont Trust’ for authority to complete title in terms of section 24 of the Trusts (Scotland) Act 1921 to the trust estate of the late Mrs Ross.
The circumstances under which the petition is presented are as follows:—The late Mrs Ross, by holograph letters dated in 1879 and 1881, appointed trustees to hold £3000 provided by her, with instructions ( a ) to make payment of the free annual proceeds to five liferenters and the survivors and survivor, and ( b ) to convey the principal sum to the trustees under the trust settlement of her uncle, the late Archibald MacClymont, to be applied for the purposes of the trust created by his settlement.
The trustees nominated by Mrs Ross having died without assuming new trustees, on application to the Court new trustees were appointed.
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.