Beecher v Major
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 14 June 1865 |
| Date | 14 June 1865 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 62 E.R. 684
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
Voluntary Transfer of Stock. Presumption. Evidence of Destroyed Document.
[431] beecher v. major. June, 12, 13, 14, 1865. Voluntary Transfer of Stock. Presumption. Evidence of Destroyed Document. A. purchased and transferred £1000 stock in the name of her niece and wrote her a letter stating that she had done so, and that she intended it for the niece's benefit. In the letter A. inclosed a bank power which she stated was to enable her to receive the dividends for her life, which power she requested the niece to execute and return to her, and also to destroy the letter; both of which the niece accordingly did. It afterwards turned out that the bank power authorized A. to sell out the 2 DR. & SM. 432. BEECHER V, MA JOB 685 stock as well as receive the dividends; It appeared that A. had always been very kind to the niece, and by her will made before the transfer had given her an annuity of £30. The contents of the letter were proved by the niece and by a third person, to whom she had shewn it. ' Held, that the destruction of the letter being satisfactorily accounted for, the Court would receive secondary evidence of its contents, and that the intention to benefit the niece was sufficiently clearly shewn to rebut the general presumption that the stock still belonged to A., although the case could not be regarded as one of an adopted child; that there was no ademption; and therefore that the niece was entitled both to the £1000 stock and the annuity of £30. Motion for a decree. ò The suit was instituted for the administration of so much of the estate of Mary Beecher, a married woman, as she had power of disposing of; and the bill prayed {inter alia) that one of the Defendants, Mary .Major, might be declared a trustee for the Plaintiff, the husband of Mary Beecher, either in his own right or as administrator or executor of Mary Beecher, of a sum of £1000 New 3 per cent, annuities. Shortly before and in contemplation of the marriage of Mary Beecher with the Plaintiff in 1865 a sum of £2000 3 per cent, consolidated Bank annuities, railway stock and shares, Government annuities of £20 and £10, and other property were settled upon such trusts as Mrs. Beecher should, by deed or will, appoint, and, subject thereto, to pay the income to Mrs. Beecher for her life. [432] Mrs. Beecher never exercised the power to appoint by deed contained in the settlement; but by her will, dated in June 1860, she, inter alia, gave an annuity of £30 to her niece, Mary Major, spinster, during her life, for her sole and separate use; she gave...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your 7-day Trial
- Young v Sealey
-
Lynch v Burke
...Mary Lynch Plaintiff and Moira Burke and Allied Irish Banks p.l.c. Defendants Cases mentioned in this report:— Beecher v. Major (1865) 2 Drew. & Sm. 431; 62 E.R. 684; 6 New Rep. 370; 13 L.T. 54: 13 W.R. 1054. Diver v. McCrea (1908) 42 I.L.T.R. 249. Re Figgis Deceased [1969] 1 Ch. 123; [1968......
- Fadden v Deputy Federal Commissioner of Taxation
- Kauter v Hilton