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.
Subject_1 Succession Subject_2 Vesting Subject_3 Marriage-Contract Subject_4 Construction — Declaration that Interests not to Vest until Period when Trustees Directed to Pay — Trustees Directed to Pay on Expiry of Liferent, but Shares also Stated to be Payable on Majority.
Held that there was no vesting until the death of the surviving spouse, the shares being “payable” on majority having no effect in the way of accelerating vesting. Question if that would under other circumstances have postponed the period of vesting.
By her antenuptial marriage contract a wife assigned, disponed, and conveyed to trustees “all and sundry the whole means and estate, heritable and moveable, real and personal, wherever situated, now belonging to her or to which she may acquire right during the subsistence of said intended marriage.”
The wife had an interest in the marriage contract funds of her mother, but her share therein by express declaration did not vest until the death of a life-renter, her father, who had a power of appointment. The father survived the husband.
Held that, in the absence of anything in other portions of the deed to show that the wife's spes successionis was intended to be included in the conveyance by her, it was not carried to her marriage-contract 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.