Tarratt's Trustees v Hastings

JurisdictionScotland
Judgment Date07 July 1904
Docket NumberNo. 161.
Date07 July 1904
CourtCourt of Session
Court of Session
2d Division

Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Young, Lord Trayner, Lord Moncreiff.

No. 161.
Tarratt's Trustees
and
Hastings.

Succession—Faculties and Powers—Power of Appointment—Exercise by General Settlement.—

A widow, who under her marriage-settlement enjoyed the liferent of a fund with a power of appointment to the fee among the children of the marriage, died leaving a will by which she left ‘all I possess’ to a daughter named.

Held that the will was an exercise of the power, and carried the fee of the fund to the daughter named to the exclusion of the other child of the marriage.

Daniel Fox Tarratt was married to Miss Mary Stewart on 1st May 1865. By indenture of settlement made between the intended spouses, Joseph Tarratt and John Lorne Stewart, the respective fathers of the intended spouses, and the trustees under the settlement, inter alia, John Lorne Stewart bound himself to pay to the trustees £1000, and after his death a further sum of £5000, upon trust to pay the annual income thereof to Mrs Tarratt during her life, and thereafter to her husband if he survived her, and upon the death of the survivor of both spouses to stand possessed of said funds and annual income thereof for the issue of the marriage, in such shares and proportions as Mrs Tarratt should by any deed or deeds, or by her last will and testament, direct and appoint, and in default of appointment in trust for the children of the marriage, who, being a son or sons, should attain the age of twenty-one years or die under that age leaving issue, or being a daughter or daughters, should attain that age or marry, to be divided, if more than one child, in equal shares, and if there should be but one child, the whole to be in trust for such one child: Provided that no appointment should be effectual to confer a vested interest on any object thereof, who, being a male, should die under the age of twenty-one years, or being a female, should die under that age and unmarried.

Daniel Fox Tarratt died intestate in 1888, survived by his wife and by two children of the marriage, Joseph Fox Tarratt and Mary Caroline Campbell Tarratt, who afterwards married the Hon. Osmond Hastings.

Joseph Fox Tarratt died in October 1898, at the age of twenty-nine, survived by two infant sons, and leaving a will.

Mrs Mary Stewart or Tarratt died on 14th January 1904, possessed of free personalty to a considerable extent both in Scotland and in England. She left a holograph will, dated 19th May 1903...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Dick's Trustees v Cameron
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 6 June 1907
    ...TrusteesSC, March 9, 1905, 7 F. 545, per Lord President, at p. 553. 3 Smith v. Milne, 4 S. 679 (685); Tarratt's Trustees v. HastingsSC, 6 F. 968; Dalziel v. Dalziel's TrusteesSC, 7 F. 4 Middleton's Trustees v. MiddletonSC, 8 F. 1037; M'Donald v. M'Donald's Trustees, 2 R. (H. L.) 125; Dalzie......
  • Alexander's Trustees v Alexander's Trustees
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 7 July 1917
    ...141. 3 Ibid., p. 143. 4 Bray v. Bruce's ExecutorsSC 8 F. 1078; Dalziel v. Dalziel's TrusteesSC, 7 F. 545; Tarratt's Trustees v. HastingsSC,6 F. 968: Smith v. Milne, 4 S. 5 16 R. 983. 6 1915 S. C. 398. 7 16 R. 95. 8 1910 S. C. 1029. 1 8 F. 1078. 2 7 W. & S. 106, at p. 141. 3 1910 S. C. 1029.......
  • Bray v Bruce's Executors
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session
    • 19 July 1906
    ...257; M'Tavish's Trustees v. Ogston's ExecutorsSC, March 10, 1903, 5 F. 641, per Lord M'Laren, at p. 644; Tarratt's Trustees v. HastingsSC, 6 F. 968, per Lord Justice-Clerk and Lord Trayner, at p. 4 Mackenzie v. GillandersSC, 1 R. 1050, per Lord Deas, at p. 1053. 5 7 W. & S. 106, at p. 141. ......
  • Burns's Trustees v Burns's Trustees
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Session (Inner House - First Division)
    • 19 July 1935
    ...L.C., at p. 446; Smith v. Milne, (1826) 4 S. 679 (N. E. 685); M'Tavish's Trustees v. Ogston's ExecutorsUNK, (1903) 5 F. 641. 1 8 F. 1078. 2 6 F. 968. 3 1910 S. C. 1 1917 S. C. 654, at p. 659. 2 4 S. 679 (N. E. 685). 3 6 F. 968. 4 4 S. 679, at p. 682 (N. E. 685, at p. 688). 5 5 F. 641. 1 8 F......
1 firm's commentaries

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT