| 单词 | Howe v Earl of Dartmouth, rule in |
| 释义 | Howe訴Earl of Dartmouth之原則 The rule that where a testator settles a residuary personal estate giving life interests followed by interests in remainder, and the will contains no direction as to the conversion of the estate, a rebuttable presumption arises that the testator intended the beneficiaries to enjoy the property in succession. The law will require any parts of the estate that are wasting, reversionary, or hazardous, to be converted into permanent, income-bearing investments. For the purposes of determining the rights of successive beneficiaries inter se, where property will be treated as if it had been converted at the proper time: Howe v Earl of Dartmouth, Howe v Countess of Aylesbury (1802) 7 Ves 137, 32 ER 56; Re Bates, Hodgson v Bates [1907] 1 Ch 22. The same principle applies where the testator bequeaths life annuities out of wasting property: the property should be sold and a permanent fund created for payment of the annuities: Wightwick v Lord (1857) 6 HL Cas 217. The rule does not apply in the following circumstances: a contingent legacy (Re Fenwick’s Will Trusts, Fenwick v Stewart [193] Ch 720, [1936] 2 All ER 1096); where there is an indication of an intention that the property should be enjoyed in specie; but, although small indications of such an intention may be sufficient, the burden of showing the intention is upon those who desire to exclude the operation of the rule (Re Evans’ Will Trusts, Pickering v Evans [1921] 2 Ch 309); immovables situated in a foreign country (Re Moses, Moses v Valentine [1908] 2 Ch 235). See also Conversion; Remainder; Testator. 如立遺囑人確定剩餘可動產業，授予終身權益並有剩餘權益，而有關的遺囑沒有就產業權轉換作出指示，則會產生立遺囑人擬由受益人享有繼承產業的不可推翻的推定。法律要求將任何具損耗性、復歸或具危險性產業權的部分轉為永久可衍生收入的投資。為決定接續受益人相互之間的權利的目的，有關的產業會被視為猶如已在適當的時間轉換一樣：Howe v Earl of Dartmouth, Howe v Countess of Aylesbury (1802) 7 Ves 137, 32 ER 56; Re Bates, Hodgson v Bates [1907] 1 Ch 22。如有關的立遺囑人從具損耗性產業遺贈終身年金則相同的原則適用：應售賣有關的遺產及設立永久性的基金以支付年金： Wightwick v Lord (1857) 6 HL Cas 217。此規則不適用於下列情況：或有的非土地遺贈(Re Fenwick’s Will Trusts, Fenwick v Stewart [193] Ch 720, [1936] 2 All ER 1096)； 顯示有關產業應以同形式享有的意圖；儘管有此意圖的輕微顯示已可屬充分，證明有關意圖的責任在於意欲排除施行此等規則的人 (Re Evans’ Will Trusts, Pickering v Evans [1921] 2 Ch 309)；位於外國的不動產 (Re Moses, Moses v Valentine [1908] 2 Ch 235)。Conversion; Remainder; Testator。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。