MacLean v. Henning

MacLean v. Henning

The phrase "deprived of life at the same time" in the will requires actual simultaneous deprivation of life; the testator's death 16 days after his wife did not meet that requirement, so the simultaneous‑death provision did not apply and the testator died intestate as to the unprovided contingency.

Citation
(1903) 33 SCR 305
Parties
Appellant: Catherine Isabella MacLean; Appellant: Minnie MacTavish; Respondent (plaintiffs): John Henning and Others; Respondent (defendants): Ida Henning and Others; Respondent (defendant): Clara Henning
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 April 1903
Procedural Posture
Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario / Final Appellate Decision on Will Construction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario and the Divisional Court affirmed; testator held not to have died simultaneously with his wife and therefore died intestate as to that contingency.
Legal Topics
Will Construction, Survivorship, Simultaneous Death Clauses, Interpretation of Testamentary Language
Source Language
English
Estates Wills Succession Intestacy Will Construction Survivorship Simultaneous Death Clauses Interpretation of Testamentary Language

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Catherine Isabella MacLean

Appellant

Minnie MacTavish

Appellant

John Henning and Others

Respondent (plaintiffs)

Ida Henning and Others

Respondent (defendants)

Clara Henning

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada From the Court of Appeal for Ontario / Final Appellate Decision on Will Construction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the testator and his wife were "deprived of life at the same time" within the meaning of the will despite the testator dying 16 days after his wife
  2. 2 Whether the will covered the contingency of the testator surviving his wife or whether such survivorship resulted in intestacy

Ratio Decidendi

The phrase "deprived of life at the same time" in the will requires actual simultaneous deprivation of life; the testator's death 16 days after his wife did not meet that requirement, so the simultaneous‑death provision did not apply and the testator died intestate as to the unprovided contingency.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario and the Divisional Court affirmed; testator held not to have died simultaneously with his wife and therefore died intestate as to that contingency.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs to the plaintiffs/respondents against the appellants
  • No costs on this appeal to respondent Clara Henning