Paterson's Trustees v Paterson
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 02 February 1909 |
| Docket Number | No. 82. |
| Date | 02 February 1909 |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord President, Lord M'Laren, Lord Kinnear, Lord Pearson.
Charitable and Educational Bequests and Trusts—Uncertainty—‘Charities or benevolent or beneficent institutions.’—
A testatrix directed her trustees to divide the residue of her estate ‘among such charities or benevolent or beneficent institutions’ as they in their sole discretion should think proper.
Held that the bequest was to be construed as a bequest in favour of charitable institutions, and was not void from uncertainty.
Hay's Trustees v. Baillie, 1908, S. C. 1224, followed.
The late Miss Helen Paterson, Laurel Villa, Strathaven, by her trust-disposition and settlement conveyed her whole estate to trustees for the purposes therein mentioned. By the third purpose she directed her trustees to pay certain legacies, including a legacy of £200 to the Western Infirmary of Glasgow; and the fifth purpose was as follows:—‘I direct my trustees, after implement of the foregoing legacies, to divide the whole residue of my said whole means and estate among such charities or benevolent or beneficent institutions (including the Western Infirmary) as they in their sole discretion shall think proper, and in such proportions as they may think advisable.’
Questions having arisen as to the validity of this bequest of residue, a special case was presented on July 18, 1908, for the opinion of the Court, to which Miss Paterson's testamentary trustees were the first parties, and her heirs in mobilibus were the second parties.
The second parties contended that the residue clause ‘is too vague and indefinite to receive effect, and further is void in respect that the beneficiaries sought to be benefited cannot with reasonable certainty be ascertained.’ The first parties contended that the power conferred upon them to divide the residue ‘is validly conferred, and that the said provision is not void from uncertainty.’
The questions of law for the opinion of the Court were:—‘(1) Is the fifth clause of the trust-disposition and settlement of the deceased sufficiently definite to receive effect, and are the first parties entitled to distribute the residue of the estate in terms of it? or (2) Does the residue of the testatrix's means and estate fall to be disposed of as intestate estate?’
The case was heard on January 28th and February 2d, 1909.
Argued for the first parties;—This case was practically indistinguishable from Hay's Trustees v. Baillie,1 and was ruled by that decision. ‘Charities’ written long was really ‘charitable institutions,’ and so written the description was practically identical with that in Hay's Trustees,1 except for the addition of the word ‘beneficent,’ an addition
of too little significance to affect the construction. ‘Benevolent’ and ‘beneficent’ were really merely exegetical of ‘charities,’ and the whole phrase was equivalent to ‘charitable institutions,’...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reid's Trustees v Cattanach's Trustees
...to tenderness, I think the Court would once and for all draw the line at any such construction. In Paterson's Trustees v. Paterson, 1909 S. C. 485, the First Division followed their previous decision in Hay's Trustees v. Baillie. It cannot, therefore, be read in any wider sense than that de......
-
Chichester Diocesan Fund & Board of Finance (Incorporated) v Simpson
...nature" ( Hay's Trustees v. Baillie, 1908, S.C. 1224); or among "charities or benevolent or beneficent institutions" ( Paterson's Trustees v. Paterson, 1909, S.C. 485); or among "charitable or philanthropic institutions" ( Mackinnon's Trustees v. Mackinnon, 1909, S.C. 1041). The topic is......
-
Turnbull's Trustees v Lord Advocate
...any difficulty, and in the light of decided cases I do not think it does.Hay's Trustees v. Baillie, 1908 S. C. 1224; Paterson's Trustees, 1909 S. C. 485; Mackinnon's Trustees, 1909 S. C. Accordingly I am prepared to hold that the residuary bequest under Mrs Turnbull's settlement is not void......
-
Caldwell's Trustees v Caldwell
...3 Mer. 17; In re MacduffELR, [1896] 2 Ch. 451, per Lindley, L.J., at p. 464, and Lopes, L.J., at p. 468; Paterson's Trustees v. Paterson, 1909 S. C. 485; Campbell's Trustees v. Campbell, supra, p. 2 2 W. & S. 80. 3 1918 S. C. (H. L.) 88, [1918] A. C. 337. 4 1908 S. C. (H. L.) 3, [1908] A. C......