In Re Ferguson

In Re Ferguson

The appeal is dismissed: the court held that the clause purporting to give effect to a gift over could not operate on the facts because the contingency to which it was linked did not and could not occur as construed by appellants, and that the ordinary meaning of 'own right heirs' applies only where a contrary intention appears; here the daughter’s devise by her own will disposed of the property and therefore she (and her devisees) took the estate.

Citation
(1897) 28 SCR 38
Parties
Appellants (defendants): Annie Turner; Margaret Ann Goodman; Mary Jane Walsh; Respondent (plaintiff): Mary Ann Bennett; Respondents (trustees of the Will of Edward Ferguson): William Purdy; Carrie W. Eggleston; Jane H. Eggleston; Frank Purdy Eggleston; Emily Barnes; William Charles Ball; Emerson Coatsworth; Emerson Coatsworth Junior; Respondents (defendants): Margaret Jane Carson; Edward Galley; William John Ball
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 November 1897
Procedural Posture
Will Construction and Estate Administration Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Construction of Will, Meaning of 'own Right Heirs', Vesting of Estate, Testamentary Power to Devise
Source Language
English
Estates Wills and Succession Trusts Construction of Will Meaning of 'own Right Heirs' Vesting of Estate Testamentary Power to Devise

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Annie Turner; Margaret Ann Goodman; Mary Jane Walsh

Appellants (defendants)

Mary Ann Bennett

Respondent (plaintiff)

William Purdy; Carrie W. Eggleston; Jane H. Eggleston; Frank Purdy Eggleston; Emily Barnes; William Charles Ball; Emerson Coatsworth; Emerson Coatsworth Junior

Respondents (trustees of the Will of Edward Ferguson)

Margaret Jane Carson; Edward Galley; William John Ball

Respondents (defendants)

Procedural Posture

Will Construction and Estate Administration Appeal / Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is meant by 'my own right heirs' in the will
  2. 2 Whether the daughter had a testamentary power to devise the property in question
  3. 3 Whether the devise over to 'own right heirs' could take effect given the actual sequence of deaths

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed: the court held that the clause purporting to give effect to a gift over could not operate on the facts because the contingency to which it was linked did not and could not occur as construed by appellants, and that the ordinary meaning of 'own right heirs' applies only where a contrary intention appears; here the daughter’s devise by her own will disposed of the property and therefore she (and her devisees) took the estate.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs
  • Motion to quash dismissed with costs