Do you want BuboFlash to help you learning these things? Or do you want to add or correct something? Click here to log in or create user.



Tags
#constitution #equity #law
Question
It even applies where the donee becomes an administrator on the intestacy of the donor: [case]). Walton J doubted this in Re Gonin [1979] Ch 16 because the donor has no responsibility for making the donee becoming administrator of his estate, so that Strong v Bird would have been decided differently if the defendant had been an administrator and not the executor appointed by the testator,but his remarks were obiter because he found no continuing intention to give a house to the plaintiff.
Answer
Re James [1935] Ch 449

Tags
#constitution #equity #law
Question
It even applies where the donee becomes an administrator on the intestacy of the donor: [case]). Walton J doubted this in Re Gonin [1979] Ch 16 because the donor has no responsibility for making the donee becoming administrator of his estate, so that Strong v Bird would have been decided differently if the defendant had been an administrator and not the executor appointed by the testator,but his remarks were obiter because he found no continuing intention to give a house to the plaintiff.
Answer
?

Tags
#constitution #equity #law
Question
It even applies where the donee becomes an administrator on the intestacy of the donor: [case]). Walton J doubted this in Re Gonin [1979] Ch 16 because the donor has no responsibility for making the donee becoming administrator of his estate, so that Strong v Bird would have been decided differently if the defendant had been an administrator and not the executor appointed by the testator,but his remarks were obiter because he found no continuing intention to give a house to the plaintiff.
Answer
Re James [1935] Ch 449
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"

Parent (intermediate) annotation

Open it
It even applies where the donee becomes an administrator on the intestacy of the donor: Re James [1935] Ch 449). Walton J doubted this in Re Gonin [1979] Ch 16 because the donor has no responsibility for making the donee becoming administrator of his estate, so that Strong v Bird would have be

Original toplevel document (pdf)

cannot see any pdfs

Summary

statusnot learnedmeasured difficulty37% [default]last interval [days]               
repetition number in this series0memorised on               scheduled repetition               
scheduled repetition interval               last repetition or drill

Details

No repetitions


Discussion

Do you want to join discussion? Click here to log in or create user.