Re Gregory's Settlement and Will
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 14 June 1865 |
| Date | 14 June 1865 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 55 E.R. 767
ROLLS COURT
S. C. 11 Jur. (N. S.) 634; 13 W. R. 828; 6 N. R. 282.
[600] Re gregory's settlement and will. June 13, 14, 1865. [S. C. 11 Jur. (N. S.) 634; 13 W. R. 828; 6 N. R. 282.] Bequest to "Francis, the youngest son of F. G-." He had no son Francis, but he had an eldest named Arthur Francis and a youngest named Arthur Charles, who was the testator's godson. Held, that the youngest was entitled to the legacy. Family repute admissible to shew that a legatee was the godson of the testator. A former will of a testator held admissible evidence on a question as to which of two persons was intended to take as legatees. By his will, dated the 2d of December 1825, the testator gave as follows :- " I give and bequeath unto Francis Gregory, the youngest son of my brother Francis Gregory, from and after the decease of myself and Caroline Gregory my wife, all and singular the moneys to arise," &c., from the sale of certain property. The testator died in 1847 and his wife in 1861. Francis Gregory, the brother of the testator, had three sons only. The eldest was 768 BERDOE V. DAWSON 34BKAV.601. named Arthur Francis Gregory, the second was named Arthur William Gregory and the youngest Arthur Charles Gregory. They all survived the testator. [601] The question was, which of the sons was entitled under the above bequest to Francis, the youngest son, it being claimed both on behalf of the eldest, Arthur Francis, and the youngest, Arthur Charles. There was evidence that, in a prior will, dated the 13th of February 1825, the testator had devised the property to " Charles Gregory, the youngest son of his brother Francis Gregory." There was evidence that it had always been believed in the family that the testator was the godfather of the youngest son, but there was no strict proof of the fact. The reception of this evidence was objected to. Mr. Hobhouse and Mr. Dickinson, for the representatives of Arthur Charles Gregory, the youngest son. First, extrinsic evidence is admissible to shew the state of the family and the knowledge of the testator. Secondly, the description of " youngest son " must prevail, for the name is inaccurate as applied to either. Mr. Baggallay and Mr. Herries, for the representatives of Arthur Francis. Evidence of intention to be derived from a former will is inadmissible, and the fact of being a godson is not proved. Secondly, the rule " veritas norninis tollit errorem desmptionis...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cuthbertson Estate, Re, 2011 ABQB 704
...Kelly J. 39. Re Burke , [1960] O.R. at 32, 20 D.L.R. (2d) 356, per Laidlaw J.A. 40. Re Gregory's Settlement and Will (1865), 34 Beav. 600, 55 E.R. 767; Coard v. Holderness (1855), 20 Beav. 147, 52 E.R. 559. 41. Re Spadafore , [19501 O.W.N. 709 at 710 (H.C.), per Smiley J., affirmed [1951] O......