ANNE MELVILLE TANNOCK v. LINDA ANNE MCGHEE OR TANNOCK & JAMES MITCHELL & GRAEME DAVID BRABSON [2011] ScotSC 159 (11 October 2011)

ANNE MELVILLE TANNOCK v. LINDA ANNE MCGHEE OR TANNOCK & JAMES MITCHELL & GRAEME DAVID BRABSON [2011] ScotSC 159 (11 October 2011)

The Party Minuter, Graeme David Brabson, is not disqualified from inheriting under the will because he was not involved in the planning, execution, or procurement of the killing, and the Forfeiture Act 1982 does not extend the forfeiture rule to accessories after the fact. The rule of public policy does not apply to his conduct, and his entitlement is not 'through or under' the killer in a manner that would trigger forfeiture.

Citation
[2011] ScotSC 159
Parties
Pursuer: Anne Melville Tannock; Defender: Linda Anne McGhee or Tannock; Defender: James Mitchell; Party Minuter: Graeme David Brabson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Succession/inheritance / Judgment After Debate (motion to Dismiss)
Outcome
Action dismissed as against the Party Minuter; crave 1 (excluding Mrs Tannock from inheriting) granted of consent; hearing on expenses assigned.
Legal Topics
Forfeiture Rule, Unlawful Killing and Inheritance, Public Policy in Succession, Aiding and Abetting, Accessory After the Fact
Succession Law Criminal Law Forfeiture Rule Unlawful Killing and Inheritance Public Policy in Succession Aiding and Abetting Accessory After the Fact

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anne Melville Tannock

Pursuer

Linda Anne McGhee or Tannock

Defender

James Mitchell

Defender

Graeme David Brabson

Party Minuter

Procedural Posture

Civil Succession/inheritance / Judgment After Debate (motion to Dismiss)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the forfeiture rule or Forfeiture Act 1982 preclude Graeme David Brabson from inheriting under the will of John Grieve Tannock, given his conviction for attempting to pervert the course of justice after the killing?
  2. 2 Does a beneficiary who is not involved in the killing but assists after the fact fall within the scope of the forfeiture rule or public policy exclusion from inheritance?

Ratio Decidendi

The Party Minuter, Graeme David Brabson, is not disqualified from inheriting under the will because he was not involved in the planning, execution, or procurement of the killing, and the Forfeiture Act 1982 does not extend the forfeiture rule to accessories after the fact. The rule of public policy does not apply to his conduct, and his entitlement is not 'through or under' the killer in a manner that would trigger forfeiture.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed as against the Party Minuter; crave 1 (excluding Mrs Tannock from inheriting) granted of consent; hearing on expenses assigned.

Orders

  • Sustains plea in law 1 for the Party Minuter.
  • Repels pursuer's pleas in law 2, 3 (insofar as directed against the Party Minuter), 4, and 5.