cases Flashcards
incorporated external pieces of paper which wasn’t signed into the will
Davidson v Convy
coerced an old lady into writing a will
Boyle v Boyle’s Trs
solicitor forgot to write a will, was sued for the lost money.
Home v Bank of Scotland
if a child is born after a will is made then the will will be void and will be reduced.
stuart gordon v stuart gordon
Abaitment- not enough money to pay everyone
McConnel v McConnels Trs
a legacy contrary to public policy will be void
Fraser v Rose.
demonstrative legacy- not enough funds from that specific bank that the testator wanted it from so needs to be taken from elsewhere
Reid’s Trs v Dawson
Ademption- cannot give that which you do not own, question of fact not of intention
Cobbans Exrs v Cobban
if a trustee dies then the trustor has a duty to appoint a new trustee
Glentar v scottish Industrial Musical Association
trust is void if too vague
Hardie v Morrison
a trust set up for religous purposes will be invalid
Rintoul’s Trs v Rintoul
Interpretation of the will- what the testator intended- step into the testators chair and see it from their perspective
Hay v Duthie
case for different people trying to claim from the legacy of the testator.
(different shops with the same name)
extrinsic evidence is needed
Cathcarts Trs v Bruce
what if you put a legacy to someone but their relationship has changed since then?
e.g your wife but now you are divorced?
there is a general rule that description was not a condition on the legacy.
Ormiston’s Exr v Laws
case which showed actor in rem sutm where the contract was set aside
aberdeen railway company v Blakie Brothers
