Cameron's Trustees v. Mackenzie and Others [1915] ScotLR 307 (15 January 1915)

Cameron's Trustees v. Mackenzie and Others [1915] ScotLR 307 (15 January 1915)

The holograph writings attached to the deposit-receipts did not contain sufficient indication of testamentary intention and thus did not constitute valid testamentary bequests. The residuary clause empowering trustees to distribute among 'charitable institutions, persons, or objects' is not void for uncertainty, as the context shows the testatrix intended all to be recipients of charity.

Citation
[1915] ScotLR 307
Parties
First Parties (testamentary Trustees): George Duncan Collie and another (Cameron's Trustees); Second Party (named Legatee): Mrs Elizabeth Rachel Mackenzie; Third Party (brother, Next of Kin): John Cameron; Fourth Party (niece, Next of Kin): Miss Annie Elizabeth Cameron
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 January 1915
Procedural Posture
Special Case (court of Session, Inner House, First Division) / Judgment on Questions of Law Regarding Testamentary Writings and Validity of Residuary Clause
Outcome
The holograph writings do not constitute valid testamentary bequests; the residuary clause is valid and effectual.
Legal Topics
Testamentary Intention, Validity of Informal Testamentary Writings, Charitable Bequests, Uncertainty in Trust Purposes
Succession Trusts and Estates Testamentary Intention Validity of Informal Testamentary Writings Charitable Bequests Uncertainty in Trust Purposes

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

Parties

George Duncan Collie and another (Cameron's Trustees)

First Parties (testamentary Trustees)

Mrs Elizabeth Rachel Mackenzie

Second Party (named Legatee)

John Cameron

Third Party (brother, Next of Kin)

Miss Annie Elizabeth Cameron

Fourth Party (niece, Next of Kin)

Procedural Posture

Special Case (court of Session, Inner House, First Division) / Judgment on Questions of Law Regarding Testamentary Writings and Validity of Residuary Clause

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether holograph writings attached to deposit-receipts constitute valid testamentary bequests
  2. 2 Whether the residuary clause empowering trustees to distribute among 'charitable institutions, persons, or objects' is void for uncertainty

Ratio Decidendi

The holograph writings attached to the deposit-receipts did not contain sufficient indication of testamentary intention and thus did not constitute valid testamentary bequests. The residuary clause empowering trustees to distribute among 'charitable institutions, persons, or objects' is not void for uncertainty, as the context shows the testatrix intended all to be recipients of charity.

Court Disposition

The holograph writings do not constitute valid testamentary bequests; the residuary clause is valid and effectual.

Orders

  • First and third questions of law answered in the negative (writings not valid bequests)
  • First alternative of the fourth question answered in the affirmative (residuary clause valid)