Ward v. Van der Loeff
House of Lords
[1924] A.C. 653 (1924)
- Written by Paul Neel, JD
Facts
William John Dalzell Burnyeat died survived by his wife, Hildegard (defendant), his 67-year-old mother and father, and his four siblings. The year he died, William executed a codicil to his will. The codicil terminated a life interest to Hildegard if she remarried a naturalized British subject and revoked Hildegard’s power to designate will beneficiaries among William’s nieces and nephews. The codicil also left the remainder of Hildegard’s life interest in trust for the benefit of any children of William’s brothers and sisters living at or born within 21 years after Hildegard’s death. After William’s death, Hildegard married Van der Loeff, a naturalized British subject. One of William’s nephews, Philip Ponsonby Burnyeat (plaintiff), was born thereafter. The trial court voided William’s class gift to his nieces and nephews as violating the rule against perpetuities, which then excluded Philip from a share of the gift under the will and codicil because Philip was born after Hildegard married Van der Loeff. Philip appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Haldane, J.)
Concurrence (Dunedin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
