In re Miller’s Agreement, Uniacke v Attorney-General: ChD 1947

Two partners had covenanted with a retiring partner that on his death they would pay certain annuities to his daughters. The Revenue claimed estate duty.
Held: The claim was rejected. The daughters were not parties to the agreement, and had no right to sue for their annuities. Whether they received them or not depended on whether the other partners were willing to pay or if they did not pay whether the deceased partner’s executor was willing to enforce the contract. After citing the earlier cases Wynn-Parry J. said: ‘I think it emerges from these cases that the section has not the effect of creating rights but only of assisting the protection of rights shewn to exist.’


Wynn-Parry J


[1941] 1 Ch 615


Law of Property Act 1925 56


CitedIn re Foster 1938
. .

Cited by:

CriticisedSmith and Snipes Hall Farm Ltd v River Douglas Catchment Board CA 1949
Benefit of Covenant Ran with Land
In 1938, landowners and the Catchment Board agreed that the Board would make good and maintain the banks of a stream, with the landowners contributing to the cost. The agreement was not said to be for the benefit of the landowner’s successors in . .
CitedBeswick v Beswick HL 29-Jun-1967
The deceased had assigned his coal merchant business to the respondent against a promise to pay andpound;5.00 a week to his widow whilst she lived. The respondent appealed an order requiring him to make the payments, saying that as a consolidating . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Contract, Inheritance Tax

Updated: 01 May 2022; Ref: scu.251042