Watson's Trustees v. Watson [1913] ScotLR 901 (17 July 1913)

Watson's Trustees v. Watson [1913] ScotLR 901 (17 July 1913)

The trustees are entitled to pay over James Watson's share to him absolutely because the will gave him a right of fee, and the declaration that the provision is alimentary is legally ineffectual to restrict that right or protect it from creditors. The testator's intention to make the provision alimentary cannot override the legal principle that a fee cannot be made alimentary.

Citation
[1913] ScotLR 901
Parties
First Parties: William Watson and others (Trustees of William Stewart Watson); Second Party: James Watson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 July 1913
Procedural Posture
Special Case (construction of Testamentary Provision) / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session (final Judgment)
Outcome
First question answered in the affirmative (trustees entitled to pay over share to James Watson); second question answered in the negative (not bound to retain share for alimentary use); third question superseded.
Legal Topics
Construction of Testamentary Writings, Alimentary Provisions, Discretionary Powers of Trustees, Fee Vs Liferent, Creditor Protection
Succession Trusts Construction of Testamentary Writings Alimentary Provisions Discretionary Powers of Trustees Fee Vs Liferent Creditor Protection

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Watson and others (Trustees of William Stewart Watson)

First Parties

James Watson

Second Party

Procedural Posture

Special Case (construction of Testamentary Provision) / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session (final Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trustees are entitled to pay over to James Watson his share of residue absolutely or must retain it for his alimentary use
  2. 2 Whether a declaration that a provision is alimentary can restrict a right of fee
  3. 3 Whether the testator's intention to protect the share from creditors is legally effective

Ratio Decidendi

The trustees are entitled to pay over James Watson's share to him absolutely because the will gave him a right of fee, and the declaration that the provision is alimentary is legally ineffectual to restrict that right or protect it from creditors. The testator's intention to make the provision alimentary cannot override the legal principle that a fee cannot be made alimentary.

Court Disposition

First question answered in the affirmative (trustees entitled to pay over share to James Watson); second question answered in the negative (not bound to retain share for alimentary use); third question superseded.

Orders

  • Trustees may pay over James Watson's share of residue to him absolutely.
  • No obligation to retain the share for alimentary use.