Woolridge v Woolridge
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 21 February 1859 |
| Date | 21 February 1859 |
| Court | High Court of Chancery |
English Reports Citation: 70 E.R. 340
HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY
S. C. 5 Jur. (N. S.) 566. See Churchill v. Churchill, 1867, L. R. 5 Eq. 50; Bate v. Willats, 1877, 37 L. T. 222. Distinguished, White v. White, 1882, 22 Ch. D. 555.
Will. Appointment under a Power. Objects not within the Power. Election.
[63] woolridge v. woolridge. Feb. 21, 1859. [S. C. 5 Jur. (N. S.) 566. See Churchill v. Churchill, 1867, L. E. 5 Eq. 50; Sate v. Willats, 1877, 37 L. T. 222. Distinguished, White v. White, 1882, 22 Ch. D. 555.] Will. Appointment under a Power. Objects not within the Power. Election. Where there is an absolute appointment by will in favour of a proper object of the power, and that appointment is followed by attempts to modify the interest so appointed, in a manner which the law will not allow, the Court reads the will as if all the passages in which such attempts are made were swept out of it, for all intents and purposes, i.e., not only so far as they attempt to regulate the quantum of interest to be enjoyed by the appointee in the settled property, but also so far as they might otherwise have been relied upon as raising a case of election. In 1809, by the settlement on the marriage of James Woolridge, since deceased, and Caroline, his wife, two sums, now represented by 2500 3 per cent, consols and 1897, 14s. 9d. New 3 per cent, long annuities, were settled upon certain trusts for their benefit during their respective lives; and after the decease of the survivor, upon trust, in the events which happened, for the children of the marriage, at such time and times, and in such proportions, manner and form as Caroline should by deed or will appoint; and in default of appointment, upon trust for all the children of the marriage equally. The Plaintiff, Otway Woolridge, and the Defendants, James Woolridge and Caroline Biscoe, now the wife of the Defendant, William Biscoe, were the only children of the marriage. JOHNS. 64. WOOLRIDGE V. WOOLKIDGE 341 In 1825 Caroline Woolridge, having survived her husband, and being possessed of personal estate and effects of her own, which remained in her possession at her death, made her will, by which, after reciting her marriage settlement in exercise of the power therein contained, she directed and appointed that George Treweeke, the surviving trustee under her settlement, should, from and immediately after her decease, stand possessed of the said stock, and the dividends thereon, upon the trusts thereinafter declared of the same; and as to all other real and personal estate and effects over which she had any disposing power, or which should belong to her at her death, she devised and bequeathed the same to George Treweeke and Humphry Grylls, upon the trusts thereinafter declared-that was to [64] say, upon trust, out of the dividends, interest and annual proceeds of all and singular the said'trust moneys and premises, to pay an annuity to her daughter Caroline (then a spinster) so long as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mr R Faraz v Core Education Trust: 1303060/2015
...Governor) 62. The Claimant was represented by Lawrence Shaw from NASUWT and had three witnesses, namely; • Nina Laumann • Steph Green • Gus John 63. The investigation team for the Respondent were Richard Powell and Andrew Packer, who was Executive Principal, Park View Educational Trust. Als......
- Stewart v Williams
-
Tredennick v Tredennick
...54. Stuart v. Babington 27 L. R. I. 551. Turner v. KingELR [1895] 1 Ch. 361. Wollaston v. KingELR L. R. 8 Eq. 165. Woolridge v. WoolridgeENR John. 63. Power — Execution — Excessive appointment — Appointment to object for life, with power to appoint by will — Perpetuity — Appointment to A of......
-
D'abbadie v Bizoin and Others
...v. Lane 17 Ves. 101. Cooper v. MartinELR L. R. 3 Ch. App. 47; 2 Wms. on Exec. 1111. Stroud v. NormanENR Kay, 313. Woolridge v. WoolridgeENR John. 63. Crozier v. Crozier 3 Dr. & War. 353. Stolworthy v. Sancroft 10 Jur. N. S. 762. David's TrustsENR John. 498. Strutt v. Brathwaite 5 D. & Sm. 3......
-
Property as capture and care.
...James L. Huffman, Trusting the Public Interest to Judges: A Comment on the Public Trust Writing of Professors Sax, Wilkinson, Dunning and Johnson, 63 DENV. U. L. REV. 565 passim (1986) (discussing the public trust doctrine's history and subsequent application in the courts to preserve natur......
-
WESTERN WATER LAW AND THE CHALLENGE OF CLIMATE DISRUPTION.
...James L. Huffman, Trusting the Public Interest to Judges: A Comment on the Public Trust Writings of Professors Sax, Wilkinson, Dunning and Johnson, 63 DENV. U. L. REV. 565, 584 (1986) (arguing to improve the private rights system rather than relying on public (167) See Nat'l Audubon Soc'y v......
-
Strategic Management Concepts for Antitrust: Cooperation, Stakeholders and Sustainability
...texts without the Harvard Business Pub-lishing case may provide a richer overview. Two such textbooks standout. The first, Harrison and St. John,63 enthusiastically embraces stake-holder theory as on e of the “co re topics a nd curren t issues i n thefield. ”64 The authors of the second, Ca......
-
Preliminary sections
...(1940) 19 N.L.R. 141……………………………………......……………….142 Miller Bros. (of Liverpool) Ltd. v. Abudu Ayeni 5 N.L.R. 40……………………………..…….433 Minet v. Johnson 63 L.T.R. (1890) All E.R. (Rep) 586……………......……………………637, 645 Minister of Health v. Bellotti (1944) 1 All E.R. 238……………………................549, ......
-
Ministry of Health Provisional Orders Confirmation (No.13) Act 1930
...Street Fletcher Lowton Lowton 52 Moreton Tnn stables sheds outbuildings and yard (public-house) 166 Cowick Street Ditto George Johns George Johns 63 Moreton Inn yard Ditto Ditto George Johns Charles Fletcher Lowton 54 House shop out- Reginald He my Nora Grace Nora Grace buildings and yard 1......