Turnbull's Trustees v. Lord Advocate [1917] ScotLR 501 (26 June 1917)

Turnbull's Trustees v. Lord Advocate [1917] ScotLR 501 (26 June 1917)

The majority held that the bequest was void for uncertainty because the phrase 'public, benevolent, or charitable purposes in connection with the parish of Lesmahagow or the neighbourhood' did not sufficiently particularise a class of objects, and the addition of a geographical limitation did not remove the fundamental vagueness of 'public purposes'. The trustees were left with unfettered discretion, which is not permissible under Scots law for testamentary dispositions.

Citation
[1917] ScotLR 501
Parties
Pursuers: John Houston, British Linen Bank, Lanark, and others, trustees under the trust-disposition and settlement of the late Mrs Annabella Robertson Paterson or Turnbull; Defender: Lord Advocate
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
26 June 1917
Procedural Posture
Multiplepoinding and Exoneration / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Decision
Outcome
Bequest declared void for uncertainty; Lord Advocate's claim sustained; trustees' claim repelled.
Legal Topics
Uncertainty in Testamentary Bequests, Charitable and Public Purpose Trusts, Geographical Limitation in Trusts
Succession Trusts Uncertainty in Testamentary Bequests Charitable and Public Purpose Trusts Geographical Limitation in Trusts

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 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Houston, British Linen Bank, Lanark, and others, trustees under the trust-disposition and settlement of the late Mrs Annabella Robertson Paterson or Turnbull

Pursuers

Lord Advocate

Defender

Procedural Posture

Multiplepoinding and Exoneration / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a bequest for 'public, benevolent, or charitable purposes in connection with the parish of Lesmahagow or the neighbourhood' is void for uncertainty
  2. 2 Whether geographical limitation cures the uncertainty of 'public purposes'

Ratio Decidendi

The majority held that the bequest was void for uncertainty because the phrase 'public, benevolent, or charitable purposes in connection with the parish of Lesmahagow or the neighbourhood' did not sufficiently particularise a class of objects, and the addition of a geographical limitation did not remove the fundamental vagueness of 'public purposes'. The trustees were left with unfettered discretion, which is not permissible under Scots law for testamentary dispositions.

Court Disposition

Bequest declared void for uncertainty; Lord Advocate's claim sustained; trustees' claim repelled.

Orders

  • Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary recalled.
  • Claim for Mrs Turnbull's trustees repelled.