Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

Page.

Page.

Devaynes v. Noble - 221. 227 | Houghton v. West - - - 352

Donald's case - - - 712. 722 Humphreys v. Hollis - - 193

Don v. Lippman - - 134. 141 | Hunter v. Gardner - 300. 302

Dormer v. Fortescue - - 352 Hutchinson v. Massarene - 537

Douglas v. Forrest - 130. 134

Doyle v. Blake - - - - 534

James, Ex parte - - 699. 706

Druce v. Denison - 752.756.759

Jesson v. Wright - - - - 540

Jones v. Price - - 239. 242

Edgesbury v. Stephens - 454

Kearnan v. Fitsimon - - 536

Edwardes v. M'Leay - - 631

Keble v. Graham's Trustees 132.

Egerton v. Forbes - - -

Ellis v. Deane - -

135

Kelsall v. Kelsall

- v. Selby -

- - - 195

- -

Kennedy v. Campbell - -

Emery v. Wase - -

-- v. Earl of Cassilis -

Evans v. Bicknell

9

-

Evatt v. Price

-

-

-

v. M.Douall

-

-

Kimberley v. Jennings - - 397

Faine v. Brown - - - - 397

King (The) v. Arkwright - 454

Kirwan v. Kirwan

Fenton v. Browne

-

- - • 779

- - 129

Flarty v. Odlum - -

Knight v. Knight - - - lyo

301. 303

Foote v. Stewart - - - 492 Laing v. Craig - - - - 497

Fox v. Mackreth - - - 699

Lawson v. Langley - 239. 242

Fraser v. Gordon - - - 561 Laycock v. Clarke - - - 454

Leslie v. Leslie - - - - 700

Gaillie's Case - - - - - 303 Lidderdale v. Duke of Mon-'
Geddes, Er parte - - - 10 trose - - - - - - - 301
Giffin v. Orr - - - - 495 Lindsey v. Orr - - - - 497
Gordon v. Gordon - 196. 200 Lynn v. Beaver · - 190. 198
Gough v. Davis - - 129. 133
Grant v. Astle - - - - 786 M·Innes v. Moir - - - - 318
- v. Grant - - - - 352 | Macniel v. MacGregor - - 313
--0. Mennons - - 318 M‘Tavish v. Lady Saltoun - 133
Griffith v. Apprice - - - Mainwaring v. Ellerker - 544
Gugelman v. Duport -

Mason v. Corder - - - - 632
Guthrie v. Cowan - - 492 Meredith v. Heneage - 190. 201

Moffatt v. Robinson - 278. 288

Hall o. Grant . . . - - 496 Montgomerie (Lady)v.Wau-

Hamilton v. Houghton 532. 540 chope - - • 279.282. 287

Hamley v. Gilbert - - - 55 Moorhouse v. De Passou - 637

Harnett v. Yielding - - - 397 Mortlock v. Buller - 397. 788

Harrison v. Courtaud - - 637 Mungar's case - - - - 303

- v. Timmins - - 636. 652 Murray v. The East India

Hart v. Alexander - 129. 134 Company. -: · 131. 132
Hatter v. Hatter - - 754. 757 Murray v. Shadwell - - - 637
Heath o. Percival - - - 129
Henley v. Phillips - - . 701 O'Connor v. Malone - 182
Higginson v. Clowes - 392. 631 Oldfield v. Oldfield - - - 542

[ocr errors]

Page

Page.
Palmer & Co.'s Assignees, v. Sheriff v. Axe - - . . . 278

Glas - - - - - 132. 142 | Simson v. Ingham 223. 228

- v. Bate - - - 300. 307 Sitwell v. Bernard - - - 94

Parsons v. Thompson - - 300 | Slatter v. Slatter - - 753. 757

Patallo v. Maxwell - - - 492 Sloan's Case - - - - - 302

Pemberton v. Oakes - 223. 228 Small v. Attwood - 351. 358

Pearson v. Casamajor - - 74 Smith v. Smith - - - - 220

Pease v. Hirst - - - - 221 Spain (King of) v. Machado,

Perry v. Phelps - - - - 371

538. 546

Pergse v. Persse - - - - 393 Spiers v. Houston - - - 227

Pickering v. Lord Stamford 753 Sym v. Charles - - 278. 288

756 Syme v. Browne - - - - 637

Pitt v. Bonner - - - - 350 Sympson v. Hormby 753. 756

Pluck v. Digges - - - - 757

Pope v. Roots ... - 397 Taylor v. Bacon - - - - 56
Pottinger v. Wightman - - -- v. Kello - - - - - 318
Prestongrange (Lord) v. The -- v. Salmon - - - - 706

Magistrates of Hadding -- v. Waters - 351.359.368

ton - - - - - - - 492 Tennant's Patent- - - - 454
Price v. Assheton - - - 397 Thompson v. Percival
Prowse v. Abingdon - - 536 Thoruton v. Dixon -
Pulteney v. Warren - 352. 359

Tibbett's Case -

Tickle v. Brown - - - - 238

Queen v. Lords of the Trea Titus v. Perkins - - - - 786

sury - - - - - - - 426 Trower v. Newscomb - - 779

- v. Mayor of Bridge Turner v. Robinson · 430. 434

water - - - - - - 420 Twining v. Morris - - - 788

- 0. Mayor of Norwich 428

Underwood v. Hitchcock - 397
Ramsden v. Hylton • - - 397
Rex v. Robinson - - - - 423 | Vaux Peerage Case - - - 157
Rhodes v. Smethurst - 131. 134
Richards v. Fry - - 239. 242

Wall v. Bushby - - - - 191

Robinson v. Pett - - .- 278 Warrender v. Warrender -

-- v. Tickell ---- 55 White v. Damon - - - - 789

Roebuck v. Stirling - - - 446 – P. Parnther • • • •

534
Royal Bank of Scotland v... Williams v. Kershaw - - 423
Cuthbert - · · · 9

Wilson v. Falconer – 300. 307
Russell v. The Glasgow Road Wood v. Wood - - - - 54
Trustees - - - - - Wright v. Atkins - - - 190

-- v. Mitchell 351. 359. 368
Savage v. Foster - • - 48 -- v. Williams - 239. 242
Scott v. Fenwick - • - 637
- v. Hanson - - - - 641 Yates v. Thomson - - - 10
Selkrig v. Davies - - - - 9 York Building Company v.
Shaw v. Lawless - -

| Mackenzie - - - - - 278

[blocks in formation]

The persons named as trustees and executors in the will of a 1st Appeal.

domiciled Scotchman having declined to act, his next of kin obtained letters of administration of his personal estate in England Personal from the proper Ecclesiastical Court there, and afterwards con- Estate. sented to the appointment, by the Court of Session in Scotland, Domucile. of other persons as trustees and executors in place of those A

tion. named in the will, with all the powers that had been thereby given to them. These trustees so appointed raised an action in the Court of Session against the administratrix, calling on her to transfer to them the personal estate possessed by her under the

administration, and offering her a full release from liability.HELD by the Lords (reversing the decree of the Court of Session),

that the personal estate in England must be administered there

by the administratrix, by virtue of the letters of administration, The law of the domicile of a deceased person governs the succes

sion to his personal estate, wherever situated; but the estate itself must be administered in the country in which possession is taken

of it under lawful authority. The Courts in Scotland have no power to appoint persons to administer personal property in England, that power being exclusively vested in the English Ecclesiastical Courts; and of that the Scotch Courts are bound to take notice.

SIR ROBERT PRESTON, Baronet, a domiciled
Scotchman, died at his place of residence in Scot-

VOL. VIII.

PRESTON

VISCOUNT MELVILLE.

1st APPEAL.

I

land, in May 1834, leaving a trust disposition, deed
of settlement and will, by which he granted, dis-
poned and made over to and in favour of Sir Coutts
Trotter, Baronet, Edward Marjoribanks, Esq., and
Sir Edmund Antrobus, Baronet, bankers in London,
and to the survivors and survivor of them and
their assigns, and the assigns of the survivor, in
trust for the uses, ends and purposes therein par-
ticularly declared, all his lands, heritages, tiends,
fishings, tenements, and other heritable or real
estate of whatever description ; and all property and
estate whatsoever or of whatever denomination, then
belonging, or that might belong to him at the time
of his death, wherever situated, in Scotland, England,
or elsewhere; and also all debts and sums of money
due or belonging to him at his death, heritable or
moveable, real or personal, wherever and in what.
ever way secured ; and also all personal estate and
effects of whatever nature, quality or denomination,
with the title deeds of the heritable subjects and the
vouchers of the debts : surrogating and by the trust
disposition, &c. substituting the said trustees in his full
right and place of the premises, with power to them
to do whatever he could have done before granting
thereof, and binding himself and his heirs to make up
complete titles to the lands, heritages and heritable
debts thereby disponed, if necessary, and to convey
the same in all form to the said trustees, for the pur-
poses therein mentioned : and he appointed the said
Sir Coutts Trotter, E. Marjoribanks, and Sir E.
Antrobus, and the survivors and survivor of them, to
be sole and only executors or executor of his said
will, and intromitters and intromitter with his estate
and effects falling under executry, thereby empower-
ing them to expede confirmations and letters of

1840.

PRESTON

VISCOUNT MELVILLE.

1st APPEAL.

administration in due form, secluding from the said office all others his nearest of kin; declaring that if an inventory of the debts due, and personal estate belonging to him, should be made up and signed by him as relative thereto, the same should supersede confirmation in Scotland, or administration in England, being thus to be held as a special conveyance, and to be valid to every intent and purpose; but always under the conditions, and for the ends, uses, trusts and purposes therein underwritten.

The trust deed contained various directions to the trustees and executors relative to the management and disposition of Sir Robert's large heritable estates, and personal property. The former were situated in Scotland; the personal property, which also was of large amount, was partly vested in Scotland, and partly in England in Government securities and Bank of Eng. land stock. The immediate objects of the trust were bis three nieces : viz., the Appellant; her sister, Miss Catherine Preston; and Dame Anne Hay, wife of Sir John Hay, Baronet: to whom the trustees were to pay annually, in equal shares, the surplus yearly rents and proceeds of the whole property (after payment of debts and certain legacies and annuities), with benefit of survivorship between them; and Sir John Hay was to be entitled to the interest of his wife, in the event of his surviving her.

All the persons named in the deed as trustees and executors having declined to accept the trust, letters of administration with the deed and will annexed were, on the 18th of July 1834, granted by the Prerogative Court of Canterbury, as to the personal property in England, to the Appellant, as one of the next of kin of the testator, the other two nieces and next of kin, and Sir John Hay, consenting, and becoming

was

« ZurückWeiter »