Pringle v Pringle
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 09 July 1856 |
| Date | 09 July 1856 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 52 E.R. 1251
ROLLS COURT
[631] pbingle v. pringle. July 9, 1856. On the marriage of a female infant, a settlement of her personal estate was executed, giving an interest to the issue in the event of the husband surviving his wife, but none in the contrary event. Held, that the issue could not, on the latter event, take by implication or construction. Held, also, that the husband had not, by the settlement, reduced the fund into possession. In 1790 Andrew Pringle married Cordelia Fortnam, an infant of the age of eighteen, in India. By the settlement executed on their marriage, and made between Mr. Pringle of the first part, Mrs. Pringle of the second part, and trustees of the third part, reciting that her fortune consisted of divers sums of money, bonds, &c., in the hands of her father's executors in Chancery, it was declared that they should be held on trust for Mr. Pringle for life, and in case he should die in Mrs. Pringle's lifetime, leaving no issue of the marriage, then on trust to permit to Mrs. Pringle to receive the money, bonds, &c. And in case Mrs. Pringle should die in the life of Mr. Pringle, leaving issue of the marriage, then (subject to Mr. Pringle's life interest) on certain trusts for such issue. It will be observed that no provision was made for the issue of the marriage in the event of Mr. Pringle dying in Mrs. Pringle's life, leaving issue, and which event happened. But a provision was expressly made for them, in that event, out of the husband's property. In the suit in Chancery (Fortnam v. Home) the Master reported that the settle- 1252 PRINGLE V. PRINGLE 22 BBAV. 832. ment was a proper settlement, and in 1797 an order was made to transfer the share of Mrs. ft-ingle in the funds (2128) to the trustees of the settlement. [632] Mr. Pringle died in 1804, leaving four children and his wife surviving. All the original trustees having died, three new trustees were appointed, in 1838, by Mrs, Pringle. In 1842 Mrs. Pringle and the new trustees instituted a suit, in which a further gum (1787) was recovered from the representatives of the original trustees, as included in the settlement. Mrs. Pringle died in 1854, having received the income of the trust funds down to her death, The executors of Mrs. Pringle claimed " the whole of the trust funds, upon two grounds, viz., 1st, that in the events which happened, the trust funds were undisposed of by the settlement, and therefore the absolute...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hamilton v Mills
...assent and concurrence, to the trustees, on the express trusts of the settlement; Burnham v. Bennett (2 Coll. 254); Pringle v. Pringle (22 Beav. 631); Hansenv. Millar (14 Sim. 22); hi the Matter of Jenkins (5 Russ. 183); Cuningham v. Antrobus (16 Sim. 436) ; Anderson v. Dawson. (15 Ves. 532......
-
Champ v Champ and Others
...re Nash's SettlementUNK 51 L. J. Ch. (N. S.) 511; 46 L. T. (N. S.) 97; 30 W. R. 406. Wilson v. PaulENR 7 Sim. 620. Pringle v. PringleENR 22 Beav. 631. In re Rawlin's Trusts 45 Ch. Div. 299. Kinsella v. CaffreyUNK 11 Ir. Ch. Rep. 154. Neighbour v. ThurlowENR 28 Beav. 33. Ranelagh v. Ranelagh......
-
Cummins v Hall and Cummins
...(9) 38 Ch. D. 1. (10) 4 H. L. Cas, 435. (1) 1 L. R. Ir. 206. (2) L. & G. (temp. Sugd.) 177. (3) 51 L. J. Ch. 511. (4) 23 Beav. 450. (5) 22 Beav. 631. (6) 2 Ch. D. (7) [1903] 1 Ch. 373. (1) 1 L. R. Ir. 206. (1) 2 Ch. D. 44. ...