The case for validity rested on Re Allen [1953] Ch 810, a case concerning the validity of a gift subject to a condition precedent, which decided such a gift is valid if [...]. As the case had not been overruled by McPhail v Doulton Browne- Wilkinson J was happy to follow it in Re Barlow’s WT. He decided that the direction conferred a series of options to purchase, each conditional on the claimant being a ‘friend’. The direction was valid, as anyone who could prove that ‘by any reasonable test he or she must have been a friend of the testatrix’ was entitled to exercise the option (and he indicated certain minimum requirements for friendship, which you may or may not agree with!) He noted that if it had been a discretionary trust, the word ‘friends’ would have been too uncertain, citing Re Lloyds Trust Instruments (1970), unreported
Answer
it is possible to say of one or more persons that he or they qualify although it may be difficult to say of others whether they qualify or not
Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
The case for validity rested on Re Allen [1953] Ch 810, a case concerning the validity of a gift subject to a condition precedent, which decided such a gift is valid if [...]. As the case had not been overruled by McPhail v Doulton Browne- Wilkinson J was happy to follow it in Re Barlow’s WT. He decided that the direction conferred a series of options to purchase, each conditional on the claimant being a ‘friend’. The direction was valid, as anyone who could prove that ‘by any reasonable test he or she must have been a friend of the testatrix’ was entitled to exercise the option (and he indicated certain minimum requirements for friendship, which you may or may not agree with!) He noted that if it had been a discretionary trust, the word ‘friends’ would have been too uncertain, citing Re Lloyds Trust Instruments (1970), unreported
Answer
?
Tags
#certainties #equity #law
Question
The case for validity rested on Re Allen [1953] Ch 810, a case concerning the validity of a gift subject to a condition precedent, which decided such a gift is valid if [...]. As the case had not been overruled by McPhail v Doulton Browne- Wilkinson J was happy to follow it in Re Barlow’s WT. He decided that the direction conferred a series of options to purchase, each conditional on the claimant being a ‘friend’. The direction was valid, as anyone who could prove that ‘by any reasonable test he or she must have been a friend of the testatrix’ was entitled to exercise the option (and he indicated certain minimum requirements for friendship, which you may or may not agree with!) He noted that if it had been a discretionary trust, the word ‘friends’ would have been too uncertain, citing Re Lloyds Trust Instruments (1970), unreported
Answer
it is possible to say of one or more persons that he or they qualify although it may be difficult to say of others whether they qualify or not
If you want to change selection, open original toplevel document below and click on "Move attachment"
Parent (intermediate) annotation
Open it The case for validity rested on Re Allen [1953] Ch 810, a case concerning the validity of a gift subject to a condition precedent, which decided such a gift is valid if it is possible to say of one or more persons that he or they qualify although it may be difficult to say of others whether they qualify or not. As the case had not been overruled by McPhail v Doulton Browne- Wilkinson J was happy to follow it in Re Barlow’s WT. He decided that the direction conferred a series of options to pu
Original toplevel document (pdf)
cannot see any pdfs
Summary
status
not learned
measured difficulty
37% [default]
last interval [days]
repetition number in this series
0
memorised 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.