Ewing's Trustees v. Crum Ewing [1923] ScotLR 358 (09 March 1923)

Ewing's Trustees v. Crum Ewing [1923] ScotLR 358 (09 March 1923)

The event upon which the £20,000 is to be paid is described in terms too ambiguous and lacking in precision to constitute a valid real burden on the estate. The phrase 'sell the estate' is open to multiple reasonable interpretations, making it impossible to determine with certainty when the obligation arises. Therefore, the condition cannot operate as a real burden affecting the estate in the hands of singular successors.

Citation
[1923] ScotLR 358
Parties
First Parties: John Thomas Sheriff Watson and others (Ewing's Trustees); Second Party: Humphry Ewing Crum Ewing of Strathleven
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 March 1923
Procedural Posture
Special Case / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session
Outcome
First question answered in the negative; second question refused as too abstract.
Legal Topics
Real Burden, Personal Obligation, Construction of Disposition, Uncertainty in Deeds
Property Law Trusts and Estates Real Burden Personal Obligation Construction of Disposition Uncertainty in Deeds

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 1 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Thomas Sheriff Watson and others (Ewing's Trustees)

First Parties

Humphry Ewing Crum Ewing of Strathleven

Second Party

Procedural Posture

Special Case / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the payment of £20,000 is constituted a real burden on the estate of Strathleven.
  2. 2 Whether a sale by the second party of a portion of the estate makes him personally liable to pay the £20,000.

Ratio Decidendi

The event upon which the £20,000 is to be paid is described in terms too ambiguous and lacking in precision to constitute a valid real burden on the estate. The phrase 'sell the estate' is open to multiple reasonable interpretations, making it impossible to determine with certainty when the obligation arises. Therefore, the condition cannot operate as a real burden affecting the estate in the hands of singular successors.

Court Disposition

First question answered in the negative; second question refused as too abstract.

Orders

  • The payment of £20,000 is not constituted a real burden on the estate of Strathleven.
  • The Court refused to answer whether a sale of a portion of the estate makes the second party personally liable to pay the £20,000.