Denholm's Trustees v. Denholm's Trustees [1907] ScotLR 154 (29 November 1907)

Denholm's Trustees v. Denholm's Trustees [1907] ScotLR 154 (29 November 1907)

The husband was under no obligation to keep accounts of his wife's estate. The onus of proving that any portion of the wife's estate was unconsumed and identifying such portion lay upon the pursuers. The pursuers failed to discharge this onus except as to the bond for £6000, which remained identifiable. All other assets were consumed within the meaning of the mutual settlement by being realised and mixed with the husband's own funds.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 154
Parties
Pursuers (plaintiffs): Denholm's Trustees; Defenders (defendants): Denholm's Trustees
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 November 1907
Procedural Posture
Civil Succession/trusts / Appeal (inner House, Second Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to (majority).
Legal Topics
Mutual Settlement, Power of Consumption, Onus of Proof, Trustee Duties, Intromission With Estate
Succession Law Trust Law Mutual Settlement Power of Consumption Onus of Proof Trustee Duties Intromission With Estate

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Denholm's Trustees

Pursuers (plaintiffs)

Denholm's Trustees

Defenders (defendants)

Procedural Posture

Civil Succession/trusts / Appeal (inner House, Second Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the husband was obliged to account for his intromissions with his wife's estate under a mutual trust-disposition and settlement.
  2. 2 Whether the onus of proof lay on the wife's trustees to show any portion of the estate remained unconsumed at the husband's death.
  3. 3 The meaning and extent of the husband's power to 'consume' the wife's estate.

Ratio Decidendi

The husband was under no obligation to keep accounts of his wife's estate. The onus of proving that any portion of the wife's estate was unconsumed and identifying such portion lay upon the pursuers. The pursuers failed to discharge this onus except as to the bond for £6000, which remained identifiable. All other assets were consumed within the meaning of the mutual settlement by being realised and mixed with the husband's own funds.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to (majority).

Orders

  • Declarator and delivery granted as to the £6000 bond.
  • Quoad ultra, absolvitor (dismissal) in favour of defenders.