Young v. Waterson [1917] ScotLR 24 (19 October 1917)

Young v. Waterson [1917] ScotLR 24 (19 October 1917)

The nomination under the association's rules was a procedural mechanism to facilitate payment and did not confer a beneficial interest on the nominee. The sum of £45 formed part of the deceased's estate and was subject to the terms of his will. The association's rules did not preclude the member from disposing of the sum by will, and the nominee, having received the money, was bound to distribute it according to the will.

Citation
[1917] ScotLR 24
Parties
Pursuer: Mary Young; Defender: Mrs Helen Tarrant or Waterson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 October 1917
Procedural Posture
Succession Dispute / Appeal From Sheriff to Court of Session Inner House
Outcome
Appeal sustained; interlocutor of Sheriff recalled; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute restored.
Legal Topics
Nomination Under Assurance Association, Effect of Will on Nomination, Beneficial Entitlement of Nominee, Unregistered Mutual Assurance Association
Succession Insurance Law Nomination Under Assurance Association Effect of Will on Nomination Beneficial Entitlement of Nominee Unregistered Mutual Assurance Association

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Young

Pursuer

Mrs Helen Tarrant or Waterson

Defender

Procedural Posture

Succession Dispute / Appeal From Sheriff to Court of Session Inner House

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a sum payable by an unregistered mutual assurance association to a nominee forms part of the deceased's estate and is subject to the terms of the deceased's will
  2. 2 Whether the nomination confers a beneficial interest or is merely a mandate to collect

Ratio Decidendi

The nomination under the association's rules was a procedural mechanism to facilitate payment and did not confer a beneficial interest on the nominee. The sum of £45 formed part of the deceased's estate and was subject to the terms of his will. The association's rules did not preclude the member from disposing of the sum by will, and the nominee, having received the money, was bound to distribute it according to the will.

Court Disposition

Appeal sustained; interlocutor of Sheriff recalled; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute restored.

Orders

  • The sum of £45 is part of the deceased's estate and must be distributed according to the will.
  • The defender may claim against the executry estate for one-half thereof as provided by the will.