It was held in Morice v Bishop of Durham that `every [non-charitable] trust must have a definite object . There moldiness be someone in whose favour the court faecal matter decree performance Indorsing the beneficiary rationale contained in Morice v Bishop , Viscount Simmonds give tongue to , `if a gift is made to individuals whether under their aver names or in the name of their society and the termination is reached that they are not intended to take beneficially past they take as trustees . If so , it must be observed who are the beneficiaries . If at the death of the testator the figure of beneficiaries is placed and ascertained or ascertainable within the put of the rationale against perpetuities , all is well . If it is not so dictated and not so ascertainable the trust must failIn the field of honor cited p receding(prenominal) , Leahy v A-G for New South Wales , the court was concerned with the efficiency of gifts to a non-charitable unincorporated association .
One gift was declared as follows :- `AS to my property known as Elmslea restrain at Bungendore aforesaid and the whole of the lands comprising the same and the whole of the piece of furniture contained in the homestead thereon UPON TRUST for much(prenominal) of Nuns of the Catholic Church or the Christian Brothers as my Executors and Trustees shall get hold of and 1 again direct that the selection of the of Nuns or Brothers as the case may be to benefit under this article of my allow for shall be in th! e sole and absolute finesse of my said Executors and TrusteesAnother gift was a direction to the trustees of the estate to harbor the income and principle in the `provision of amenities and for the building of a convent . Viscount Simmonds was of the picture that gifts of this nature , that is , gifts to...If you want to get a plenteous essay, give it on our website:
OrderCustomPaper.comIf you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper
No comments:
Post a Comment