M'Conochie's Trustees v M'Conochie
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 18 May 1909 |
| Docket Number | No. 159. |
| Date | 18 May 1909 |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Low, Lord Ardwall.
Charitable and Educational Bequests and Trusts—Uncertainty—‘Educational, charitable, and religious purposes.’—
A testator directed his trustee to divide the residue of his estate ‘amongst such educational, charitable, and religious purposes within the city of Aberdeen as he shall select to be the recipients thereof.’
Held that the bequest was to be construed as a bequest for any one or more of the three purposes named as the trustee should select, and that as the description ‘religious’ was indefinite the bequest was void from uncertainty.
The late George Charles M'Conochie, Aberdeen, by his trust-disposition and settlement conveyed his whole estate to Mr L. Mackinnon, as trustee for the purposes therein mentioned. After family provisions, the testator, by the third purpose of the will, directed his trustee to pay certain legacies, including a legacy of £125 to the funds of the Free Gilcomston Church, Aberdeen, £100 to the poor of Gilcomston parish, £100 to the Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, and various personal bequests. The will proceeded:—‘And whatever reversion of my said estate, heritable and moveable, there may be over and above meeting the foresaid annuities, provisions, and bequests, I hereby direct my said trustee, failing my making further bequests or leaving further provisions from the same, to divide the same, as he shall think fit, amongst such educational, charitable, and religious purposes within the city of Aberdeen as he shall select to be the recipients thereof.’
Questions having arisen as to the validity of this bequest of residue, a special case was presented on 13th August 1908, to which Mr M'Conochie's trustees were the first parties, and the persons entitled to his means and estate ab intestato were the second parties.
The first parties contended that the residue clause was valid and effectual.
The second parties contended that the bequest of residue contained in said clause was void from uncertainty.
The question of law for the opinion and judgment of the Court was—‘Is the said bequest of residue void from uncertainty?’
The case was heard on 18th May 1909.
Argued for the first parties;—The Court was more ready to adopt an interpretation which gave effect to a will than one which did not.1 If the words of the bequest were to be read disjunctively, the bequest was admittedly void. But prima facie‘and’ meant ‘and’...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reid's Trustees v Cattanach's Trustees
...Lord AdvocateELR, 1918 S. C. (H. L.) 88, Lord Finlay, L.C., at p. 90, [1918] A. C. 337, at p. 341; M'Conochie's Trustees v. M'Conochie, 1909 S. C. 1046, Lord Justice-Clerk Macdonald at p. 1047. 7 Hill v. Burns, (1826) 2 W. & S. 80; Miller v. Black's Trustees, (1837) 2 Sh. & M'L. 866, Lord B......
-
Turnbull's Trustees v Lord Advocate
...between the use of the word institutions and the word purposes when read with reference to a particular locality (M'Conochie's Trustees, 1909 S. C. 1046). It would certainly have been easier to reach the decision I have arrived at if the word in this case had been institutions and not purpo......
-
Bannerman's Trustees v Bannerman
...at p. 291, and 7 F. (H. L.) 90. 3 Brown's Trustees v. M'IntoshUNK, (1905) 13 S. L. T. 72; M'Conochie's Trustees v. M'Conochie, 1909 S. C. 1046; M'Phee's Trustees v. M'Phee, 1912 S. C. 75, per Lord Dundas, at p. as not to be an ascertainable entity. Accordingly, I cannot hold that the partic......
-
Turnbull's Trustees v Lord Advocate
...(1905) 7 F. (H. L.) 90, [1905] A. C. 124; Shaw's Trustees v. Esson's TrusteesSC, (1905) 8 F. 52; M'Conochie's Trustees v. M'Conochie, 1909 S. C. 1046; Goodman v. Mayor of SaltashELR, (1882) 7 App. Cas. 633, per Earl Cairns, at p. 650; Magistrates of Dundee v. MorrisUNK, (1858) 3 Macq. 134, ......