Rose's Trustees v. Rose and Others [1916] ScotLR 630 (29 June 1916)

Rose's Trustees v. Rose and Others [1916] ScotLR 630 (29 June 1916)

A beneficiary who elects to claim legitim, where the testamentary provision is expressly stated to be in full satisfaction of legitim, absolutely forfeits all rights under the will; such forfeiture is complete and final, and the beneficiary cannot revert to the testamentary provision after compensation. The intention of the testatrix, as expressed in the settlement, is decisive.

Citation
[1916] ScotLR 630
Parties
First Parties (testamentary Trustees): Dr William Allen and another (Trustees of Mrs Maria Le Berge Laurie or Rose); Second Party (son of Testatrix): Hugh Rose; Third Party (daughter of Hugh Rose): Ethel Lois Laurie Rose (with consent of Hugh Rose as curator-at-law); Fourth Party (son of Hugh Rose): Hugh Rose as tutor-at-law of Hugh Erskine Laurie Rose; Fifth Parties (other Beneficiaries): Mrs Zibbie de Castro Laurie or Ogilvie and others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 June 1916
Procedural Posture
Special Case (court of Session, Inner House, First Division) / Judgment After Argument Before Seven Judges on Questions of Construction and Effect of Election Under Testamentary Settlement
Outcome
Second party (Hugh Rose) by electing to claim legitim has completely and finally lost all beneficial right and interest in the conventional provisions conceived in his favour by his mother's settlement.
Legal Topics
Election Under Will, Approbate and Reprobate, Legitim (legal Rights of Children), Testamentary Provisions in Full Satisfaction of Legitim, Equitable Compensation, Forfeiture of Testamentary Benefits
Succession Law Trusts and Estates Election Under Will Approbate and Reprobate Legitim (legal Rights of Children) Testamentary Provisions in Full Satisfaction of Legitim Equitable Compensation Forfeiture of Testamentary Benefits

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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr William Allen and another (Trustees of Mrs Maria Le Berge Laurie or Rose)

First Parties (testamentary Trustees)

Hugh Rose

Second Party (son of Testatrix)

Ethel Lois Laurie Rose (with consent of Hugh Rose as curator-at-law)

Third Party (daughter of Hugh Rose)

Hugh Rose as tutor-at-law of Hugh Erskine Laurie Rose

Fourth Party (son of Hugh Rose)

Mrs Zibbie de Castro Laurie or Ogilvie and others

Fifth Parties (other Beneficiaries)

Procedural Posture

Special Case (court of Session, Inner House, First Division) / Judgment After Argument Before Seven Judges on Questions of Construction and Effect of Election Under Testamentary Settlement

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a beneficiary who elects to claim legitim forfeits all rights under a testamentary provision expressed to be 'in full' of legitim
  2. 2 Whether such forfeiture is absolute or only until equitable compensation is made
  3. 3 Effect of such election on the rights of other beneficiaries under the settlement

Ratio Decidendi

A beneficiary who elects to claim legitim, where the testamentary provision is expressly stated to be in full satisfaction of legitim, absolutely forfeits all rights under the will; such forfeiture is complete and final, and the beneficiary cannot revert to the testamentary provision after compensation. The intention of the testatrix, as expressed in the settlement, is decisive.

Court Disposition

Second party (Hugh Rose) by electing to claim legitim has completely and finally lost all beneficial right and interest in the conventional provisions conceived in his favour by his mother's settlement.

Orders

  • Court finds that the second party, by electing to claim his legal rights, has completely and finally lost all beneficial right and interest in the conventional provisions under the trust-settlement.
  • Equitable compensation to be made to beneficiaries prejudiced by the election, with further questions on compensation to be determined.