Kekewich v Manning
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1851 |
| Date | 01 January 1851 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 42 E.R. 519
BEFORE THE LORDS JUSTICES.
S. C. 21 L. J. Ch. 577; 16 Jur. 625. Distinguished, Bridge v. Bridge, 1852, 16 Beav. 324; Beech v. Keep, 1854, 18 Beav. 291. See Voyle v. Hughes, 1854, 2 Sm. & G. 26; Richardson v. Richardson, 1867, L. R. 3 Eq. 692; Penfold v. Mould, 1867, L. R. 4 Eq. 564; Glegg v. Rees, 1871, L. R. 7 Ch. 74; Warriner v. Rogers, 1873, L. R. 16 Eq. 349; Price v. Jenkins, 1876, 4 Ch. D. 490; In re King, 1879, 14 Ch. D. 187. Distinguished, Paul v. Paul, 1880, 15 Ch. D. 589. See In re Flavell, 1883, 25 Ch. D. 93; In re Walhampton, 1884, 26 Ch. D. 395; In re Earl of Lucan, 1890, 45 Ch. D. 474; In re Patrick [1891], 1 Ch. 87. Considered, In re Ellenborough [1903], 1 Ch. 697. See In re Spark's Trusts [1904], 1 Ch. 454.
[176] kekewich v. manning. Before the Lords Justices. Nov.'6, Dec. 15, 1851. [S. C. 21 L. J. Ch. 577 ; 16 Jur. 625. Distinguished, Bridge v. Bridge, 1852, 16 Beav. 324 ; Beech v. Keep, 1854, 18 Beav. 291. See Voyle v. Hughes, 1854, 2 Sm. & G. 26 ; Richardson v. Michardson, 1867, L. E. 3 Eq. 692 ; Penfold v. Mould, 1867, L. E. 4 Eq. 564; Glegg v. Bees, 1871, L. E. 7 Ch. 74; Warriner v. Rogers, 1873, L. E. 16 Eq. 349 ; Price v. Jenkins, 1876, 4 Ch. D. 490; In re King, 1879, 14 Ch. D. 187. Distinguished, Paul v. Paul, 1880, 15 Ch. D. 589. See In re Flavell, 1883, 25 Ch. D. 93 ; In re Walhampton, 1884, 26 Ch. D. 395; In re Earl of Lucan, 1890, 45 Ch. D. 474; In re Patrick [1891], 1 Ch. 87. Considered, In re Ellenbarough [1903], 1 Ch. 697. See In re Spark's Trusts [1904], 1 Ch. 454.] Eesiduary estate, consisting of money in the funds, was bequeathed to a mother and daughter in trust for the mother for life, and afterwards for the daughter absolutely. By a settlement made in contemplation of the daughter's marriage, the daughter assigned her interest under the will to trustees, upon trust for the issue of the intended marriage, and for a niece of the daughter and the issue of the niece. The daughter's husband died soon after the marriage, of which there was no issue. The 520 KEKEWICH V. MANNING 1DE a. M. 6 0.177. mother was not a party to the settlement, but had notice of it before the husband's death. Held, that even if the settlement was voluntary as regarded the trusts in favour of the niece, it was a complete alienation, so as to be capable of enforcement at the instance of the trustees of the settlement against the daughter, and the trustees of another settlement which she made upon a second marriage inconsistent with the former settlement. "Whether the first settlement was voluntary as regarded the trust for the niece, qmere. Robert Kekewich, by his will in 1822, bequeathed his stocks, funds and securities to his wife Elizabeth and his daughter Susannah, in trust for the wife for her life, with remainder to the daughter absolutely; and he appointed his wife and daughter executrixes of his will. The subject of the bequest consisted of £10,500 New .3^ per cents, and £500 long annuities, which were transferred into the names of the executrixes. In February 1834 Susannah, the daughter, married Sir Henry Maturin Farrington, and a settlement was made in contemplation of that marriage between Susannah Kekewich of the first part, Sir Henry Maturin Farrington of the second part, and trustees of the third part. It recited the intended marriage, and the agreements made with reference thereto. The witnessing part was thus expressed :-" Now, this indenture witnesseth that, in pursuance and execution of the said agreement, and in consideration of the said intended [177] marriage, she, the said Susannah Kekewich (with the privity, consent, and approbation of the said Sir Henry Farrington, her intended husband, testified by his executing these presents), hath granted, bargained, sold, assigned, transferred, and set over, and by these presents doth grant, bargain, sell, assign and set over unto the said Charles Kekewich, Samuel Trehawke Kekewich and George Granville Kekewich, their executors, administrators and assigns, all that the said capital sum of £10,500 New 3J per cent. Bank annuities, and also all that the said annual sum of £500 long annuities, to which respectively the said Susannah Kekewich is entitled, as aforesaid (subject to such life interest therein of the said Elizabeth Kekewich as aforesaid), and all and every the funds and securities, or fund and security, upon which the same respectively or any part thereof, now is, or are, or hereafter shall or may be placed out or invested, and all dividends, interest and annual proceeds and other produce of the same respectively, and all the estate, right, title, interest, benefit, property, claim and demand whatsoever, of her the said Susannah Kekewich, of, in, to and out of the said funds, stocks and annuities, and each of them, and the dividends and other produce thereof, and of every part thereof respectively ; to have, hold, receive, take and enjoy the said stocks, funds and annuities, and other the premises hereinbefore assigned or intended so to be, and every part thereof, unto and by them the said Charles Kekewich, Samuel Trehawke Kekewich, and George Granville Kekewich, their executors, administrators and assigns, subject, nevertheless, to the life interest therein respectively of the said Elizabeth Kekewich, as aforesaid, upon the trusts, and to and for the several ends, intents and purposes hereinafter declared or expressed concerning the same; and for the more effectually enabling the said Charles Kekewich, Samuel [178] Trehawke Kekewich, and George Granville Kekewich, and the survivors and survivor of them, and the trustee or trustees of this settlement for the time being, to ask, demand, and receive the said capital, stock and annuities hereinbefore assigned, and all necessary transfers of the same (from and after the decease of the said Elizabeth Kekewich), and all interest, dividends and accumulations thereof, she the said Susannah Kekewich, with the privity and approbation of the said Sir Henry Maturin Farrington, her intended husband, testified as aforesaid, hath made, ordained, constituted and appointed, and by these presents doth absolutely and irrevocably make, ordain, constitute and appoint, and the said Sir Henry Maturin Farrington cloth also make, ordain, constitute and appoint the said Charles Kekewich, Samuel Trehawke Kekewich, and George Granville Kekewich, and the survivors and survivor of them, his executors and administrators, and the trustee or trustees of this settlement for the time being, their and each of their true and lawful attornies and attorney for them and each of them, and in their or either of their names or name, but upon the trusts hereinafter declared, to ask, demand, recover and receive, by all lawful ways and means whatsoever, from and immediately after the 1DEO.M.* 0.179. KEKEWICH V. MANNING 521 death of the said Elizabeth Kekewich, the said capital, stock, annuities and premises hereinbefore assigned, and all necessary transfers of the same, and all interest, dividends, proceeds and produce thereof respectively; and to give acquittances, releases and discharges for the same, or any and every part thereof respectively, and upon non-payment or non-transfer of the said capital, funds, dividends and produce, or any part thereof respectively, in the name or names of the said Sir Henry Maturin Farrington and Susannah Kekewich, or either of them, or of the trustees or trustee of these presents for the time being, but upon the trusts hereinafter de-[179]-clared, to commence and prosecute all actions, suits and proceedings, and use, exercise and enforce all such or the like powers and remedies for compelling payment and transfer of the said capital, funds, dividends and produce respectively, as they, the said Susannah Kekewich and Sir Henry Maturin Farrington, or either of them, might or could do or have done if these presents had not been made. And the said Susannah Kekewich doth hereby (with the like privity and approbation of the said Sir Henry Maturin Farrington, testified as aforesaid) authorize and expressly direct that all and every the person and persons in whom the said stock and annuities, or any part thereof respectively, shall or may be vested on the decease of the said Elizabeth Kekewich, shall and do forthwith, on the decease of the said Elizabeth Kekewich, transfer and make over the said sum of £10,500 New 3J per cent, annuities, and also the said £500 per annum long annuities, and the dividends, interest and produce thereof, unto the said Charles Kekewich, Samuel Trehawke Kekewich and George Granville Kekewich, and the survivors and survivor of them, or the trustees or trustee of this settlement for the time being, according to the purport, effect, and true intent aad meaning of these presents. And it is hereby expressly agreed and declared, by and between all the said parties hereto, that they, the said Charles Kekewich, Samuel Trehawke Kekewich and George Granville Kekewich, and their executors, administrators and assigns, and the trustee or trustees of this settlement for the time being, shall stand possessed of and interested in the said sum of £10,500 New 3^ per cent, annuities, and the said annual sum of £500 long annuities (subject, nevertheless, to the life-estate of the said Elizabeth Kekewich therein as aforesaid), and of and in the produce, interest, dividends and annual proceeds [180] thereof respectively upon the trusts, and for the ends, intents and purposes following (that is to say), in trust for the said Susannah Kekewich, her executors, administrators and assigns, until the said intended marriage shall take effect and be solemnized." The trusts, after the solemnization of the marriage, were for Susannah Kekewich for her life for her separate use, and, after her decease, as to the £500 long annuities, in trust for Sir Henry Farrington for his life, and, after the decease of the survivor, as to the whole of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Federal Commissioner of Taxation v Clarke
- Corin v Patton
-
Bridge v Bridge
...95); Ex parte Pye (18 Ves. 149, and 1 Spence, Eq. Jur. 507); Meek v. Kettlewell (1 Hare, 464, and 1 Phil. 342); Kekeunch v. Manning (1 De G. M. & G. 176); B&ntley v. Mackay (15 Beav. 12); Johnson v. Legard (3 Mer. 254, n.; 3 Mad. 302; 6 M. & S. 60; Turn. & R. 281); Smith v. Garland (2 Mer. ......
-
Bartlett v Bartlett
...407); Warburton v. Hill (5 Sim. 532); Ex parte Pearce (2 M. D. & De G. 142) ; Be Arkright (2 M. D. & De G. 129); Kekewick. v. Manning (1 De G. M. & G. 176). Mr. Waller, in reply. The Act under which the insolvency took place in Be Atkinson, viz., the 7 & 8 Vic. c. 96, contains in the 17th s......