“Family” Life Insurance Policies Under the Married Women's Property Act, 1882
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1938.tb00413.x |
| Author | A. M. Finlay |
| Published date | 01 March 1939 |
| Date | 01 March 1939 |
266
MODERN
LAW
REVIEW
March,
1939
“
FAMILY
”
LIFE INSURANCE POLICIES
UNDER
THE
MARRIED
WOMEN’S
PROPERTY
ACT,
1882
HE
recent case of
Re
Sinclair’s
Life
Policy,
[1938]
3
All
E.R.
124,
once again illustrates the need of some revision
of the law relating to what are sometimes known
as
“family”
or “matrimonial” life policies.
A
change was foreshadowed,
it
will be recalled, in the
last
report of the Law Revision Committee,l
and it may be useful at this time to examine the historical develop
ment of these policies and to inquire whether the Committee’s
recommendations are necessary and sufficient.
The present law on the point
is
contained in
s.
11
of the
Married Women’s Property Act, 1882, which was aimed
at
creat-
ing, or
at
least confirming,
a
simple method whereby one spouse
might make some provision for the other spouse and children on
his or her death. In most cases the wife and children are finan-
cially dependent, at least partially, on the husband, but it must
not be forgotten that the death of
a
wife who renders ordinary
household services to her husband and family, may cause the
husband considerable expense in the future, and to that extent he
is
also
dependent on her.
The simplest way of effecting this object
is
by insuring the life
of the spouse upon whom the others are dependent, but an ordinary
policy of life insurance would not be sufficient, for on the insured‘s
death these dependants might find the whole of the insurance
moneys swallowed up in payment of debts. Consequently
a
prac-
tice grew up
of
inserting
a
rather elaborate declaration of trust in
the policy, in which the insured solemnly stated that he constituted
himself and his executors or administrators trustees of
all
moneys
to be paid under the policy, for certain named persons, being
those whom he wished to protect. The result of this, of course,
was the same as if he had executed
a
declaration of trust for
a
similar sum then belonging to him, and, provided
it
was not
a
fraud on creditors, the beneficiaries were protected to that extent.
Of course, the ability to benefit under
a
declaration of trust
of insurance moneys was not limited
to
husbands, wives, and
children of the insured; a man might quite as well effect such
a
policy for the benefit of
a
favourite nephew, his mistress, or an old
servant, etc., but as it
is
generally recognised that
a
man’s
first
duty is to his wife and children, there was
a
strong feeling that such
policies should be encouraged.
T
1
Sixth
Interim
Report;
Cmd.
5449.
To continue reading
Request your trial