Balfour-Melville v. Mylne [1901] ScotLR 38_313 (01 February 1901)

Balfour-Melville v. Mylne [1901] ScotLR 38_313 (01 February 1901)

Interest on bonds and rent-charges imposed under statutory authority after the date of the entail deed do not fall to be deducted in ascertaining the free rental for the purpose of fixing younger children's provisions, as the deed of entail does not expressly permit such deductions and must be construed according to its terms.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 38_313
Parties
Petitioner: James Heriot Balfour-Melville; Respondent: James Mylne; Respondent: Mrs Duncan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 February 1901
Procedural Posture
Petition for Authority to Restrict Provisions and Disentail / Inner House, First Division, on Reclaiming Motion (appeal) From Lord Ordinary
Outcome
Petition refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to.
Legal Topics
Entail, Younger Children's Provisions, Calculation of Free Rental, Statutory Burdens, Interpretation of Deeds
Property Law Trusts and Estates Entail Younger Children's Provisions Calculation of Free Rental Statutory Burdens Interpretation of 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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Heriot Balfour-Melville

Petitioner

James Mylne

Respondent

Mrs Duncan

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Authority to Restrict Provisions and Disentail / Inner House, First Division, on Reclaiming Motion (appeal) From Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interest on bonds and rent-charges imposed under statutory authority after the date of the entail deed are deductible in calculating 'free rental' for younger children's provisions under the entail.

Ratio Decidendi

Interest on bonds and rent-charges imposed under statutory authority after the date of the entail deed do not fall to be deducted in ascertaining the free rental for the purpose of fixing younger children's provisions, as the deed of entail does not expressly permit such deductions and must be construed according to its terms.

Court Disposition

Petition refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to.

Orders

  • No deduction allowed for interest on bonds or rent-charges in calculating free rental for children's provisions.
  • Petitioner's claim for deduction rejected.