A was by will given a right to reside rent-free in a house. She left due to ill health, and the trustees for sale sold. The question was whether A was entitled to the income of the proceeds of sale on the ground that the house was settled land and A the tenant for life.
Held: It was not settled land, the effect of A’s right to reside being only to require her consent to the exercise of the trust for sale, not depriving it of the character of an immediate binding trust for sale: see the Law of Property Act, 1925, section 205 (1) (XXIX). It seems to have been overlooked that unless A could have prevented the trustees from ousting her from possession in order to let the premises at a rent, the requirement of A’s consent to a sale would not have protected her residential rights: and that, if she could prevent that, it could only be by virtue of some interest taking priority over all aspects of the other trusts, which it would seem to us would make the land settled land with A as tenant for life.
Citations:
(1967) 204 EG 359
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Dodsworth v Dodsworth and Another CA 3-Jul-1973
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Equity
Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.650709
