Campbell's Trustees v Adamson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 May 1936 |
| Date | 21 May 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 5. |
| Court | House of Lords |
HL
Lord Blanesburgh. Lord Atkin. Lord Thankerton. Lord Macmillan. Lord Maugham.
EntailImprovement expenditureAuthority to charge estate with sum expendedAuthority obtained but charge not effected at heir's deathBequest by heir of "property over which I may have power of disposal"Whether sum expended on improvements "expressly bequeathed" by the terms of this bequestEntail Amendment (Scotland) Acts, 1875 (38 and 39 Vict. cap. 61), sec. 11, and 1878 (41 and 42 Vict. cap. 28), secs. 3 and 4.
The Entail Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1875, enacts, by sec. 11, as amended by secs. 3 and 4 of the Entail Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1878, that, where an institute or heir of entail in possession shall have died without having charged the estate with the amount which he was entitled to charge of sums expended by him on improvements, it shall be lawful for any person to whom he may have "expressly bequeathed" such sums to apply to the Court to ordain the heir of entail then in possession to execute in such person's favour a bond and disposition in security over the estate for the amount with which the deceased heir of entail might have charged the estate.
An institute of entail in possession of an entailed estate, who had expended sums upon improvements on the estate, obtained authority from the Court to charge the estate with three-fourths of the sums so expended. Immediately afterwards, and before he could execute a bond, he died. By his will he bequeathed to his trustees his real estate and the residue of his personal estate, "including any property over which I may have power of disposal by will." His trustees presented a petition craving the Court to ordain the heir of entail then in possession to execute a bond and disposition in security in their favour over the estate for the sum which the deceased had been found entitled to charge.
Held (aff. judgment of the First Division) that the prayer of the petition fell to be refused, in respect that the sum in question had not been "expressly bequeathed" to the petitioners by the deceased within the meaning of sec. 11 of the 1875 Act.
(In the Court of Session 17th July 19351935 S. C. 894.)
Michael Forbes Tweedie and others, the executors and trustees under the will of the late James Hugh Campbell of Stracathro, dated 23rd March 1933, presented a petition craving the Court to ordain William John Campbell Adamson, the heir of entail in possession of Stracathro, to execute a bond and disposition in their favour.
The petitioners averred that James Hugh Campbell, until his death on 11th March 1934, was institute of entail in possession of the entailed lands and estate of Stracathro; that since 6th April 1914 he had expended the sum of 13,336, 18s. in effecting improvements upon the estate which were "improvements" within the meaning of section 3 of the Entail Amendment (Scotland) Act, 1875; that on 10th March 1934 he obtained the warrant of the Court to charge three-fourths of a sum of 10,933, 10s. 2d. upon the estate; that on 11th March 1934, before it was possible to implement the warrant, he died, leaving a will which, inter alia, provided, by the ninth purpose, "I devise all my real estate and bequeath all the residue of my personal estate not otherwise disposed of by this my will including any property over which I may have power of disposition by will unto my trustees"; that so far as known to the petitioners there was no property which was not otherwise disposed of by the said will and to which the latter part of this clause could have been intended to apply other than the right to charge the entailed estate with the expenditure.
The petitioners craved the Court to...
To continue reading
Request your trial