Stewart v. Maclaren and Another [1919] ScotLR 66 (12 November 1919)

Stewart v. Maclaren and Another [1919] ScotLR 66 (12 November 1919)

The omission of the 28th June 1915 codicil from the confirmation in the 10th July 1915 codicil does not, by itself, amount to revocation. The evidence shows the testatrix did not intend to revoke the earlier codicil, and all testamentary writings should be read together unless clear revocation is established.

Citation
[1919] ScotLR 66
Parties
Pursuer: Miss Jessie Stewart; Defender: Duncan MacLaren, S.S.C., Edinburgh; Defender: Alasdair Iain MacLaren, W.S., Edinburgh
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 November 1919
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary After Proof
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary affirmed
Legal Topics
Revocation of Testamentary Writings, Construction of Wills and Codicils, Appointment of Trustees, Parole Evidence in Testamentary Matters
Succession Wills and Probate Revocation of Testamentary Writings Construction of Wills and Codicils Appointment of Trustees Parole Evidence in Testamentary Matters

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss Jessie Stewart

Pursuer

Duncan MacLaren, S.S.C., Edinburgh

Defender

Alasdair Iain MacLaren, W.S., Edinburgh

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the codicil of 28th June 1915 was revoked by the codicil of 10th July 1915
  2. 2 Whether omission to confirm a codicil in a later codicil implies revocation
  3. 3 Whether parole evidence is admissible to determine testamentary intention

Ratio Decidendi

The omission of the 28th June 1915 codicil from the confirmation in the 10th July 1915 codicil does not, by itself, amount to revocation. The evidence shows the testatrix did not intend to revoke the earlier codicil, and all testamentary writings should be read together unless clear revocation is established.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary affirmed

Orders

  • The codicil of 28th June 1915 was not revoked by the codicil of 10th July 1915.
  • Alasdair Iain MacLaren remains a trustee, executor, and tutor and curator under the testamentary writings.