Hay v Duthie's Trustees [1956] ScotCS CSIH_3 (13 July 1956)
Under section 15(2) of the Adoption Act, 1950, the term 'children' in a will does not include an adopted child unless the contrary intention appears from the language of the deed itself, construed according to ordinary rules. Extrinsic evidence of the testator's intention is inadmissible unless there is a true ambiguity. In this case, as there are legitimate children and nothing in the will to indicate a contrary intention, the adopted child is excluded from the benefit.
- Citation
- [1956] ScotCS CSIH_3
- Parties
- Pursuer (adopted Child): Hay; Defenders (trustees of Testator's Estate): Duthie's Trustees
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 13 July 1956
- Procedural Posture
- Civil (succession/trusts) / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) Before Inner House, Court of Session
- Outcome
- Action dismissed; reclaiming motion allowed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; defenders' first plea in law sustained.
- Legal Topics
- Interpretation of Wills, Adoption and Succession Rights, Statutory Construction, Latent Ambiguity, Testamentary Intention
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hay
Pursuer (adopted Child)
Duthie's Trustees
Defenders (trustees of Testator's Estate)
Procedural Posture
Civil (succession/trusts) / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) Before Inner House, Court of Session
Legal Issues
- 1 Does the term 'children' in a will include an adopted child under Scottish law and the Adoption Act, 1950?
- 2 Is extrinsic evidence of the testator's intention admissible to show a contrary intention under section 15(2) of the Adoption Act, 1950?
Ratio Decidendi
Under section 15(2) of the Adoption Act, 1950, the term 'children' in a will does not include an adopted child unless the contrary intention appears from the language of the deed itself, construed according to ordinary rules. Extrinsic evidence of the testator's intention is inadmissible unless there is a true ambiguity. In this case, as there are legitimate children and nothing in the will to indicate a contrary intention, the adopted child is excluded from the benefit.
Court Disposition
Action dismissed; reclaiming motion allowed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; defenders' first plea in law sustained.
Orders
- Proof before answer refused; no inquiry into extrinsic evidence of intention permitted.
- Pursuer not entitled to share in residue as a 'child' under the will.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment