Wright v Bryson
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Lord Thankerton,Lord Alness,Lord Macmillan,Lord Wright |
| Judgment Date | 21 June 1935 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1935] UKHL J0621-2 |
| Date | 21 June 1935 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Docket Number | No. 8. |
[1935] UKHL J0621-2
House of Lords
Lord Tomlin.
Lord Thankerton.
Lord Macmillan.
Lord Wright.
Lord Alness.
After hearing Counsel, as well on Thursday the 23d, as on Friday the 24th, days of May last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Miss Edith Margaret Wright (formerly Mrs. Edith Margaret Wright or Bryson, and still so known), residing at 11, Robson Street, Dundee, praying, That the matter of the Interlocutors set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary in Scotland (Lord Pitman), of the 14th of June 1933, so far as therein stated to be appealed against, and an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session there, of the First Division, sitting along with the three Lords of the Second Division, of the 17th of November 1933, and an Interlocutor of the said Lord Ordinary, of the 16th of March 1934, and also an Interlocutor of the said Lords of the First Division of the 20th of July 1934, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King, in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Interlocutors, so far as aforesaid, might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioner might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King, in His Court of Parliament, might seem meet; as also upon the printed Case of James Fyall Bryson, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Interlocutors, in part complained of in the said Appeal, be, and the same are hereby Affirmed, and that the said Petition and Appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed this House: And it is further Ordered, That the Appellant do pay or cause to be paid to the said Respondent, the Costs incurred by him in respect of the said Appeal, the amount thereof to be certified by the Clerk of the Parliaments: And it is also further Ordered, That unless the Costs, certified as aforesaid, shall be paid to the party entitled to the same within One Calendar Month from the date of the Certificate thereof, the Cause shall be, and the same is hereby remitted back to the Court of Session in Scotland, or to Judge acting as Vacation Judge, to issue such Summary Process or Diligence for the recovery of such Costs as shall be lawful and necessary.
My Lords,
I have had the opportunity of considering the opinion about to be delivered by my noble and learned friend Lord Alness. His reasons and conclusions are so fully and admirably stated in that opinion that I can add nothing to it, except to say that it has my complete agreement.
My Lords,
I am authorised by my noble and learned friend Lord Tomlin to say that he also concurs in the opinion which I am about to read.
My Lords,
The Appellant was married to the Respondent on 12th October, 1922. There are no children of the marriage. On 4th March, 1932, the Appellant obtained a decree of divorce against the Respondent on the ground of adultery. The Appellant's law agents intimated to the law agents for the Respondent a claim by the Appellant for terce and jus relictae from the estate of the Respondent at the date of the decree. The Respondent's estate at that date comprised inter alia his interest in (1) the residue of the estate of his father, the late Mr. David Sibbald Bryson, and (2) the residue of the estate of his mother, Mrs. Mary Jane Fyall or Bryson.
The Respondent's interest in his father's estate arose under the fifth purpose of his father's trust disposition and settlement, which, so far as material, provided as follows:—
"With regard to the residue of my said estate I direct my trustees to convey and pay over the same to my said wife and two sons and my daughter, Florence Bryson, and the survivors or survivor of them, and that to the extent of one-half thereof to my said wife should she survive me, and to the extent of the other half to my said sons and daughter, or wholly to them should my said wife predecease me, equally among them; but providing and declaring always with regard to the share hereby provided to my said son James Bryson, the capital of the same shall not be payable to him until he reaches the age of forty years, and that, until that event occurs, my said trustees shall pay to him only the free yearly income thereof, and that at such times and in such proportions as my trustees may determine or find convenient, and that, in the event of his death before attaining the said age of forty years, the capital in hand at his death shall be paid or conveyed to his lawful issue, if any, equally per stirpes if more than one, whom failing to his said brother and sister or the survivor of them; …… Declaring further that none of the said beneficiaries shall acquire any vested interest in their provisions until the same shall become payable to them."
The Respondent's interest in his mother's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Drysdale's Trustees v Drysdale
...Trustees v. MontgomeryUNK, (1895) 22 R. 824,followed. Hutton's Trustees v. Hutton's Trustees, 1916 S. C. 860, and Wright v. Bryson, 1935 S. C. (H. L.) 49,distinguished. Arthur Drysdale, senior, died on 24th January 1937, survived by his widow, Mrs Ada Marie Lees or Drysdale (now Armstrong),......
-
Fortington v Lord Kinnaird
...64 1930 S. C. 704. 45 5 Macph. 340. 69 1930 S. C. 704. 47 1934 S. C. (H. L.) 24. 70 20 R. 1016. 65 1932 S. C. 191. 50 M. 328. 71 1935 S. C. (H. L.) 49. 66 10 Macph. 837. 55 10 Macph. (H. L.) 26, L. R., 2 H. L. Sc. 192. 81 1918 S. C. (H. L.) 128. 82 1934 S. C. (H. L.) 24. 56 2 D. 752, at p. ......