131:
notwithstanding that he may have expressly stated that the gift is made for a particular purpose, which may prove to be impossible of performance or which may not exhaust the subject matter. This is because the testator has given the whole fund; he has not given so much of the fund as will suffice or be required to achieve the purpose, nor so much of the fund as a trustee or anyone else should determine, but the whole fund. This must be reconciled with the testator's having specified the purpose for which the gift is made. This reconciliation is achieved by treating the reference to the purpose as merely a statement of the testator's motive in making the gift. Any other interpretation of the gift would frustrate the testator's expressed intention that the whole subject matter shall be applied for the benefit of the beneficiary. These considerations have, I think, added force where the subject matter is the testator's residue, so that any failure of the gift would result in intestacy.
130:
If a testator has given the whole of a fund, whether of capital or income, to a beneficiary, whether directly or through the medium of a trustee, he is regarded, in the absence of any contra indication, as having manifested an intention to benefit that person to the full extent of the subject matter,
87:
and elsewhere. It was given to his wife "for her maintenance and for the training of my daughter, Abiola, up to university grade and for the maintenance of my aged mother". It was argued by a son from another marriage that the
292:
223:
414:
167:
235:
118:
upheld the High Court on the main point that the property was given to the daughter on trust absolutely, so nothing resulted to the
419:
326:
316:
160:
29:
103:
held that the true construction was that the money was held on trust for the wife, daughter and mother, absolutely as
153:
409:
211:
282:
259:
184:
305:
336:
96:
8:
394:
340:
201:
196:
68:
64:
92:
for the daughter was invalid, since it could be regarded as only being for a purpose.
39:
351:
135:
100:
403:
145:
123:
115:
104:
247:
89:
72:
119:
84:
83:
Mr. Patrick Osoba had left his wife and family property in
401:
175:
161:
294:Bermuda Trusts (Special Provisions) Act 1989
168:
154:
75:to benefit people, rather than a purpose.
415:Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases
327:Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 2009
317:Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 1964
71:case, concerning the construction of a
402:
149:
13:
126:concurred and said the following.
14:
431:
384:
420:1978 in United Kingdom case law
372:
363:
283:Recognition of Trusts Act 1987
1:
357:
212:Re Astor's Settlement Trusts
7:
141:
110:
42:, 1 WLR 247, 2 All ER 393
10:
436:
176:Trust enforceability cases
395:[1978] EWCA Civ 3
334:
324:
314:
302:
290:
280:
268:
256:
244:
232:
220:
208:
193:
185:Morice v Bishop of Durham
181:
65:[1978] EWCA Civ 3
51:
46:
35:
25:
20:
306:Twinsectra Ltd v Yardley
78:
410:English trusts case law
260:Re Denley's Trust Deed
133:
337:Beneficiary principle
128:
341:English trusts law
224:Re Andrew's Trusts
197:Saunders v Vautier
69:English trusts law
352:English trust law
347:
346:
56:
55:
427:
379:
376:
370:
367:
295:
170:
163:
156:
147:
146:
18:
17:
435:
434:
430:
429:
428:
426:
425:
424:
400:
399:
387:
382:
377:
373:
368:
364:
360:
348:
343:
330:
320:
310:
298:
293:
286:
285:, Sch 1, art 18
276:
264:
252:
240:
228:
216:
204:
189:
177:
174:
144:
113:
81:
30:Court of Appeal
12:
11:
5:
433:
423:
422:
417:
412:
398:
397:
386:
385:External links
383:
381:
380:
378:1 WLR 247, 257
371:
361:
359:
356:
355:
354:
345:
344:
335:
332:
331:
325:
322:
321:
315:
312:
311:
303:
300:
299:
297:ss 12A and 12B
291:
288:
287:
281:
278:
277:
269:
266:
265:
257:
254:
253:
245:
242:
241:
233:
230:
229:
221:
218:
217:
209:
206:
205:
194:
191:
190:
182:
179:
178:
173:
172:
165:
158:
150:
143:
140:
112:
109:
80:
77:
54:
53:
49:
48:
44:
43:
37:
33:
32:
27:
23:
22:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
432:
421:
418:
416:
413:
411:
408:
407:
405:
396:
392:
389:
388:
375:
366:
362:
353:
350:
349:
342:
338:
333:
328:
323:
318:
313:
308:
307:
301:
296:
289:
284:
279:
274:
273:
267:
262:
261:
255:
250:
249:
243:
238:
237:
231:
226:
225:
219:
214:
213:
207:
203:
199:
198:
192:
187:
186:
180:
171:
166:
164:
159:
157:
152:
151:
148:
139:
137:
132:
127:
125:
121:
117:
108:
106:
105:joint tenants
102:
98:
93:
91:
86:
76:
74:
70:
66:
62:
61:
50:
45:
41:
38:
34:
31:
28:
24:
19:
16:
390:
374:
365:
304:
271:
270:
258:
246:
234:
222:
210:
195:
183:
134:
129:
114:
94:
82:
59:
58:
57:
15:
248:Re Endacott
202:EWHC Ch J82
188:EWHC Ch J80
138:concurred.
136:Eveleigh LJ
404:Categories
358:References
329:ss 5, 7-11
319:ss 1 and 3
275:EWCA Civ 3
251:EWCA Civ 5
124:Buckley LJ
120:testator’s
101:Megarry VC
97:High Court
40:EWCA Civ 3
369:1 WLR 791
239:1 WLR 729
36:Citations
391:Re Osoba
272:Re Osoba
263:1 Ch 373
142:See also
122:estate.
111:Judgment
60:Re Osoba
47:Keywords
21:Re Osoba
309:UKHL 12
236:Re Shaw
227:2 Ch 48
200:(1841)
116:Goff LJ
95:In the
85:Nigeria
215:Ch 534
67:is an
52:Trusts
393:
90:trust
79:Facts
73:trust
63:
26:Court
339:and
406::
107:.
99:,
169:e
162:t
155:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.