Lester v Garland
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 August 1808 |
| Date | 08 August 1808 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 33 E.R. 748
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
See Isaacs v. Royal Insurance Company, 1870, L. R. 5 Ex. 300; Migotti v. Colville, 1879, 4 C. P. D. 234; In re Railway Sleepers Supply Company, l885, 29 Ch. D. 205; In re North, [1895] 2 Q. B. 274.
[248] lester v. garland. Rolls. June 21th, Aug. 8th, 1808. [See Isaacs v. Royal Insurance Company, 1870, L. R. 5 Ex. 300 ; Migotti v. Colville, 1879, 4 C. P. D. 234; In re Railway Sleepers Supply Company, l8S5, 29 Ch. D. 205 ; 7-7i re North, [1895] 2 Q. B. 274.] Bequest of residue, in trust, in case A. shall within six calendar months after the testator's decease give security not to marry B. then, and not otherwise, to pay to the children of A.; with a proviso to go over, if she shall refuse or neglect to give such security. A condition precedent. The six months are exclusive of the day of the testator's death: therefore; as he died on the 12th of January,between eight and nine in the evening, a security given on the 12th of July, about nine in the evening, was held sufficient. No general rule, in computing time from an act or an event, that the day is to be inclusive or exclusive ; depending on the reason of the thing, according to the circumstances. Sir John Lester by his Will, dated the 25th of December 1804, after several dispositions, gave and bequeathed all the residue of his personal estate to trustees ; upon trust, that in case his sister Sarah Pointer shall not intermarry with A. before all or any of the shares, hereinafter given to her children, shall become payable, and in case his sister shall within six calendar months after his decease give such security as his trustees or the survivor, &c., shall approve of, that she will not at any time intermarry with A. or, in case she shall so intermarry with him after the 15 VES. JUN. 249. LESTER V. GARLAND 749 periods, when all or any of the shares, hereinafter bequeathed to her children, shall become payable and shall be paid to him, her, or them, that she will within six calendar months after such marriage pay the amount of such share or shares, or cause any child or children, who shall have received his, her, or their, share or shares, to refund the same to the trustees, then, and not otherwise the trustees were directed to pay such residuary estate to the eight children of Sarah Pointer, at the age of twenty-one, or marriage, with benefit of survivorship ; with a proviso, that in case his said sister shall intermarry with A. before all or any of the shares of her said children shall become payable, as aforesaid, or shall refuse or neglect to give such security, as aforesaid, then and in either of the said cases he directed the sum of £1000 a-piece only with [249] interest from his death or failure of his issue, as aforesaid, to be paid to the children of his sister ; and, subject thereto, gave his residuary estate to the children of his other sister Amey G-arland. The testator died upon the 12th of January 1805, between the hours of eight and nine in the evening. On the 12th of June the trustees gave to Mrs. Pointer notice, to give the security, required by the Will, on or before the 12th of July. Mrs. Pointer on the 19th of June gave a written notice to the trustees, that she would give no security: but on the 6th of July she gave another notice in writing ; desiring to know the nature and extent of the security required; declaring, that she was then willing to give them her bond; which was the only security she had to offer. In consequence of that communication on the llth of July the solicitor for the trustees called upon her for the purpose of agreeing on the terms of the bond ; when she requested farther time : but afterwards by a written notice, dated on that day, she refused to execute. On the next day however, the 12th of July, upon the remonstrances of the solicitor for the trustees, she did execute the bond about seven o'clock in the evening. On the same evening two of the trustees declared their approbation of the security : but the approbation of the third, being at Bristol, could not be obtained until some...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cartwright v MacCormack, Trafalgar Insurance Company Ltd, Third Party
...point of construction binds the court on differnt words, and the word "date" did not there appear. 8 The leading case on the subject is Lester v. Garland, ( volume 15 Vesey Jr., page 248) a decisionof Sir William Grant, Master of the Rolls. That case concerned a condition precedent subject ......
-
DPP (Clarke) v Stafford
... ... The Interpretation Act, 1978 says so. It is also clear that under a rule that has been consistently applied by the courts since Lester -v- Garland [1808] 15 Ves 248 that, in calculating the period that has elapsed after the occurrence of a specified event such as the giving of a ... ...
- Wang v University of Keele
-
R (Zaporozhchenko) v City of Westminster Magistrates' Court
...Act 1889 says so. It is also clear under a rule that has been consistently applied by the courts since Lester v. Garland (1808) 15 Ves.Jun. 248, that in calculating the period that has elapsed after the occurrence of the specified event such as the giving of a notice, the day on which the e......