Duke of Argyll v. Graham's Trustees [1912] ScotLR 442 (10 February 1912)

Duke of Argyll v. Graham's Trustees [1912] ScotLR 442 (10 February 1912)

The trustees could not introduce a stranger to the estate; the ultimate beneficial interest remained with the heir of the testator. Therefore, under the 1887 Act, only relief duty was payable, not composition.

Citation
[1912] ScotLR 442
Parties
First Party (superior): The Most Noble John Douglas Sutherland Campbell, Duke of Argyll; Second Parties (trustees/vassals): Mrs Emily Eliza Hardcastle or Graham and others, Trustees of the deceased Robert Chellas Graham of Skipness
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 February 1912
Procedural Posture
Special Case (court of Session, Inner House, First Division) / Judgment on Question of Law
Outcome
Relief duty only is payable by the trustees to the superior; composition is not due.
Legal Topics
Superior and Vassal, Trusts, Entry, Casualty, Composition, Relief Duty, Infeftment, Conveyancing (scotland) Acts
Property Law Trusts and Estates Conveyancing Superior and Vassal Trusts Entry Casualty Composition +3 more

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

Parties

The Most Noble John Douglas Sutherland Campbell, Duke of Argyll

First Party (superior)

Mrs Emily Eliza Hardcastle or Graham and others, Trustees of the deceased Robert Chellas Graham of Skipness

Second Parties (trustees/vassals)

Procedural Posture

Special Case (court of Session, Inner House, First Division) / Judgment on Question of Law

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether, under the trust-disposition and settlement of Robert Chellas Graham, the trustees are liable to pay composition or only relief duty to the superior upon infeftment in the lands of Skipness.

Ratio Decidendi

The trustees could not introduce a stranger to the estate; the ultimate beneficial interest remained with the heir of the testator. Therefore, under the 1887 Act, only relief duty was payable, not composition.

Court Disposition

Relief duty only is payable by the trustees to the superior; composition is not due.

Orders

  • The Court found that relief duty only was payable by the second to the first party.