Marks v. Marks

Marks v. Marks

Majority held that the phrase 'my wife' may be interpreted in the light of surrounding circumstances known to the testator to identify the person he intended; on the facts the testator intended the woman living with him and treated by him as his wife at the time of the will and until his death to be the legatee, and the claimant alleging an 1873 marriage did not sufficiently prove she was the testator's legal wife at the relevant times; appeal dismissed and lower court judgment affirmed.

Citation
(1908) 40 SCR 210
Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: Annie Jane Marks; Respondent / Defendant: Susan Elizabeth Marks
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 May 1908
Procedural Posture
Appeal (will Construction / Estate) / Judgment on Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of British Columbia
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Supreme Court of British Columbia affirmed (Davies and Maclennan JJ. dissenting).
Legal Topics
Construction of Will, Description of Legatee, Bigamous/void Marriage, Admissibility of Surrounding Circumstances, Burden of Proof for Alleged Prior Marriage
Source Language
English
Estates Wills and Succession Family Law Conflict of Marriages Construction of Will Description of Legatee Bigamous/void Marriage Admissibility of Surrounding Circumstances +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Annie Jane Marks

Appellant / Plaintiff

Susan Elizabeth Marks

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (will Construction / Estate) / Judgment on Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of British Columbia

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the devise 'to my wife' identified the legal wife of earlier alleged marriage or the woman living with the testator when the will was executed and at his death
  2. 2 Whether extrinsic/surrounding circumstances may be considered to identify an unnamed legatee described as 'my wife'
  3. 3 Whether the appellant sufficiently proved a prior valid marriage in 1873 such that she was the legal wife at the time of the will

Ratio Decidendi

Majority held that the phrase 'my wife' may be interpreted in the light of surrounding circumstances known to the testator to identify the person he intended; on the facts the testator intended the woman living with him and treated by him as his wife at the time of the will and until his death to be the legatee, and the claimant alleging an 1873 marriage did not sufficiently prove she was the testator's legal wife at the relevant times; appeal dismissed and lower court judgment affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Supreme Court of British Columbia affirmed (Davies and Maclennan JJ. dissenting).

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Judgment of the Supreme Court of British Columbia affirmed