Earl of Winchelsea v Norcliff and Al: 1680

A guardian to an infant having a considerable sum of money in his hands, that was raised out of the infant’s estate, lays out andpound;2500 in a purchase taken in the name of IS for the benefit of the infant, if, when he came of age, he should agree thereto, and allow the trustees that money upon account. The infant dies under age. The question was whether the heir of the infant should have this estate, or whether it should be looked on as a security for andpound;2500, and go to the executors and administrators of the infant ? As precedents for the heir were cited the cases of Palmer and Allicot,(1) and Dennis and Badd (Eq. Ca. Ab. 261, pl. 1; Ch Ca 156, SC), where a guardian buys in a mortgage on the infant’s estate, and takes an assignment of it in the names of trustees.
The Court inclined to the heir, but referred this to be stated as a case by the Master. And in this case the court held, that where a person entitled to a share of an intestate’s estate dies before distribution, and within the year, there was an interest vested, and that his share should go to his executor or administrator.
In this case also the Court was of opinion, that where there is a brother of the whole blood to the intestate, and a sister of the half blood, the sister should have but half a share.


[1680] EngR 88, (1680-1687) 1 Vern 403, (1680) 23 ER 545



Wills and Probate, Children

Updated: 11 May 2022; Ref: scu.402299