Site icon swarb.co.uk

Smith v Brooksbank: 25 Jun 1834

A bequeathed a reversionary interest, expectant on his wife’s death, in a sum of stock to B. B. bequeathed it to C., and C. bequeathed it to D, who, on the death of A’s wife, filed a bill against the trustees to have the stock transferred to him, alleging that the executors of A. and B, and C. had successively assented to the bequests.
Held: that the executors were not necessary parties.

Citations:

[1834] EngR 880, (1834) 7 Sim 18, (1834) 58 ER 743 (B)

Links:

Commonlii

Cited by:

See AlsoBrooksbank v Smith 24-Feb-1836
In this case, trustees under a will, who were solicitors, had by mistake transferred stock to a person not entitled. Baron Alderson said, this being under circumstances of mistake, it appeared clear to him that the Plaintiffs were entitled to . .
See AlsoBrooksbank And Another v Smith 24-Feb-1836
The testatrix died in 1818 leaving a fund in trust, subject to a life interest, for her children in equal shares, with substitutional gifts if any child predeceased her leaving issue. Her daughter Elizabeth did predecease her by two months, but on . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Wills and Probate, Litigation Practice, Equity

Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.317556

Exit mobile version