Berkeley v Swinburne
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 02 May 1834 |
| Date | 02 May 1834 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 58 E.R. 723
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 3 L. J. Ch. (N. S.) 165. For subsequent proceedings, see 16 Sim. 275.
Will. Construction. Maintenance.
[613] berkeley v. swinburne. May 1, 1834. [S. C. 3 L. J. Ch. (N. S.) 165. For subsequent proceedings, see 16 Sim. 275.] Will. Construction. Maintenance. A. testator gave his residuary estate to trustees in trust for his sister's younger children equally, and to vest in them at the usual periods ; and he directed his trustees, during the minorities of the children, to pay the interest of their shares to his sisters or to the guardians of the children, to be applied for their maintenance and education. Held, that the sisters were entitled to receive the interest of their children's shares during the minorities of their children. Paul Francis Benfield, Esq., by his will, dated the 21st of April 1827, gave his residuary real and personal estate to trustees in trust to sell and convert the same into money, and to invest the proceeds in the usual securities in their own names ; and he directed his trustees to stand possessed of the trust funds, in trust for her mother for her life, and after her decease in trust for all the children (if there should be more than one) of his sisters Henrietta Sophia, the wife of Robert Berkeley, Esq., and Caroline Martha, the wife of Grantley Berkeley, Esq. (exclusive of an eldest or only son), or, if there should be no son or either of his sisters, exclusive of an only daughter or either of them, to take in equal shares as tenants in common absolutely, and to be vested interests in sons at 21 and in daughters at that age or marriage; and in case any of the said children should die without having attained vested interests, then in trust for the others of them ; or in case there should be originally only one child of his sisters besides an eldest or only son of each of them, or besides an eldest or only son of one of them and an only daughter of the other of them, then in trust for such only child absolutely ; but in case there should be no child who should attain a vested interest under the trusts aforesaid, then in trust for the only son or only daughter of his sister Henrietta Sophia, and the only son or only daughter of his sister Caroline Martha, as tenants in common absolutely ; but in case there should be no son or daughter of either of his sisters who should attain a vested interest in the trust [614] funds, then in trust for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thorp v Owen
...Bro. C. C. 96), Robinson v. Tickell (8 Ves. 142), Hamley v. Gilbert (Jac. 354), Badham v. Mee (1 Kuss. & Myl. 631), Berkeley v. Swinburne (6 Sim. 613), Hadow v. Hadow (9 Sim. 438), Wood v. Richardson (4 Beav. 174), Pratt v. Church (Id. 177). the vice-chancellor [Sir James Wigram], after sta......
-
The Act of 11 & 12 Vic. c. 68, and the Trusts of the Settlement of WILLIAM ORME, Esq.
...StoneyUNK 1 Dr. & War. 337; S. C. 4 Ir. Eq. Rep. 64. Hanson v. Graham 6 Ves. 239. Salmon v. GreenENR 11 Beav. 453 Berkely v. SwinburneENR 6 Sim. 613. Stephens v. Frost 2 Y. & Col. Exch. 3063. Harrison v. GrimwoodENR 12 Beav. 192. Davies v. FisherENR 5 Beav. 201. Hammond v. Maule 1 Col. 281.......
-
Page v way
...to the husband, which passed to his assignees. ' Robinson v. Tickell (8 Ves. 142), Hammond v. Neame (1 Swan. 35), Berkeley v. Swin-burn (6 Sim. 613), Robinson v, Waddelow (8 Sim. 134), and see Rippon v. Norton (2 Beavan, 63). [21] Mr. Kindersley and Mr. Keene, for the wife; and Mr. Piggott,......
-
Browne v Paull. Hoggins v Paull
...and also as to the manner in which it was to be applied. Mr. Eolt and Mr. Bush, for Mr. and Mrs. Paull, cited Berkeley v. Swinburne (6 Sim. 613), Hadow v, Hadow, Leigh v. Leigh (Jurist for 1848, p. 907), RaiJces v. Ward (1 Hare, 445), and Hawkins v. Watts (7 Sim. 199). Mr. Stuart and Mr. Go......