D'Eyncourt v Gregory
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 27 February 1864 |
| Date | 27 February 1864 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 55 E.R. 545
ROLLS COURT
[36] d'eyncourt v. gregory. Feb. 24, 26, 27, 1864. A. B. who waa tenant for life, with remainder to his issue in tail, forfeited his estate before he had any issue. Held, upon the intention apparent on an executory instrument, that the next remainder-man thereupon became entitled to the rents. A will directed a settlement to be made of the G-. estate, which should contain a shifting clause, providing that if any person taking the G. estate should not resettle the De Ligne estate (acquired through another title) to like uses, the G. estate should go to such uses as if the limitation in his favour had not been inserted. It also directed the insertion of a name and arms' shifting clause in a very different form. A. fl., a tenant for life with remainder to his children, refused to resettle the De Ligne estate, and he had no issue : Held, thereupon, the next remainderman was entitled to the rents of the G. estate until A. B died or had issue. The question, in this cause, was as to the effect of a shifting clause, by which a devised estate was to go over, if the devisee of the testator's estate should not settle other estates, acquired under another instrument to like uses. R. Via-18 546 d'eyncourt v. gregory sibeav. 37. The testator, who died in 1854, devised "the Gregory Estate" to trustees and their heirs, upon trust to raise the [37] deficiency of his personal estate to answer the purposes thereinafter directed, and upon trust that they " should convey, settle and assure " it to the uses thereinafter directed, that is to say, to other trustees for 500 years for securing some rent-charges, and (omitting the limitations which failed by the predecease of the devisees) to the use of George Gregory for life, with remainder to his sons and daughters successively in strict settlement in tail, with remainder to John Sherwin Gregory for life, with remainder to his sons and daughters successively in strict settlement in tail, with remainder to Sir Glynne E. W. Gregory for life, with remainder to his sons and daughters successively in strict settlement in tail, with remainder to the testator's own right heirs for ever. The will contained two shifting clauses, one relating to the taking and using the testator's name and arms, and the second in relation to the devisees not settling, to similar uses, other estates (called, for distinction, in the argument "the De Ligne Estates ") which had been devised by George de Ligne Gregory, the testator's uncle. These shifting clauses were as follows :- And I hereby declare and direct that in the settlement so to be made as aforesaid there shall be inserted and contained a proviso or declaration, that in case any of the persons hereby made tenants for life or any issue of any such persons shall, by virtue of or under the limitations contained in the will of George de Ligne Gregory deceased, become seised of or beneficially entitled to an estate in tail male in possession, or an estate in tail general in possession, of and in the manors, lands and hereditaments thereby appointed and devised, that then and in that case, the person so becoming seised or entitled shall, within the space of twelve calendar mouths next after he or she shall so become seised or entitled as aforesaid, if such person shall be then of the age of [38] twenty-one years, and if not, then within the space of twelve calendar months next after such person shall attain the age of twenty-one years, by such effectual assurances in the law as counsel shall advise, settle or procure to be settled as well all and singular the hereditaments comprised in or devised by the will of George de Ligne Gregory, deceased, remaining unsold, as all money, stocks, funds and securities acquired or to be acquired by the sale of timber by virtue of the same will, and all the hereditaments purchased or acquired or to be purchased or acquired with moneys arising or produced by the sale of land and timber as aforesaid, and also the several canal shares and shares in the subscription for the improvement of the navigation of the river Trent, and the moneys to arise by the sale and conversion thereof, and also all and singular the plate and other articles, by the recited will directed to go as heirlooms as aforesaid, so and in such manner as that the same hereditaments, chattels and premises respectively may go and remain and be held to, for and upon such and the same err the like uses, trusts, intents and purposes, as are, by this my will, directed to be limited and declared of and concerning the hereditaments and chattels respectively hereby devised and directed to be settled as aforesaid, except that, in the powers of sale and exchange to be inserted and contained in such settlement, there shall be an exception of Harlaxton Manor House and_the ancient mansion-house of Harlaxton Hall out of those powers, and so that the settlement required by such proviso or direction to be made shall not prejudice or affect any interest or charge or estate which, previously to the execution thereof, may have been actually created or made by virtue of any power or proviso contained in the said recited will of George de Ligne Gregory. And I...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marcus Dill v The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
...part of the design of the house and grounds, even though standing by their own weight.” This was supported by a footnote reference to D'Eyncourt v Gregory (1866) LR 3 Eq 382, but with a cautionary note: “the authority of this decision is not great; see De Falbe [1901] 1 Ch 523, at 531, 41 ......