Clayton v Ramsden case summary PDF

Preview

Summary

dddd d d d d d d d d dafsdfa sdf asdf asdf asdf asdf...

Description

Clayton v Ramsden summary Facts Will – share of residue on the condition subsequent that if she should at any time after his death marry a person “not of Jewish parentage and of the Jewish “faith” the trusts, power and provisions in favour of her and her issue and any husband so married to her should cease and determine and his will his will should operate as if she had died at the date of the marriage Condition of defeasance – a condition which defeats the beneficiaries interest Held The Jewish Parentage was void for uncertainty – as it was connected to the “faith” question, that was also void – the term was severed as a result leaving the daughter as if the term was never there Lord Atkin ‘For my own part, I view with disfavour the power of testators to control from their grave the choice in marriage of their beneficiaries, and should not be dismayed if the power were to Disappear’ Lord Russell ‘The courts have always insisted that conditions of defeasance, in order to be valid, should be so framed that the persons affected (or the court, if they seek its guidance) can from the outset know with certainty the exact event on the happening of which their interests are to be divested. The principle was enunciated many years ago' by Lord Cranworth in Clavering v. Ellison (i), in the following words: " Where a vested estate "is to be defeated by a condition on a contingency that is to "happen afterwards, that condition must be such that the "court can see from the beginning, precisely and distinctly, "upon the happening of what event it was that the preceding "vested estate was to determine." .I confess myself unable to find any context which provides an answer, but the answer may well be that, in the absence of a context to the contrary, the true construction is that both parents must be of the Jewish race. But at this point the real difficulty begins, namely, the question of degree. The testator has given no information or clue as to what percentage or proportion of Jewish blood in the husband will satisfy the requirement that he should be of Jewish parentage. The daughter could never, before marrying the man of her choice, be certain that he came up to the requisite standard of Jewish parentage, nor could a court enlighten her beforehand. The standard is unknown, and incapable of ascertainment. It is this uncertainty of degree which .prevents the divesting event from being seen precisely and distinctly from the beginning, and which makes this condition void for uncertainty. The uncertainty attaching to the requirement of Jewish parentage avoids the whole condition subsequent, with the result that no defeasance takes place. ‘...