Re Coxen [1948]
Share
Re Coxen [1948] Ch 747 revolved around the validity of a condition attached to the gift of a house. The testator, in his will, directed that the house be held in trust for the benefit of his wife, Lady Coxen, with a condition stipulating that if, in the opinion of the trustees, Lady Coxen were to permanently cease residing in the house, the property would revert to the residue.
The central issue before the court was whether this condition constituted a valid limitation upon the gift. The High Court's decision affirmed the validity of the condition, emphasising the significance of the trustees' opinion in determining Lady Coxen's interest.
Jenkins J, in delivering the judgment, underscored that the crux of the matter lay in the trustees' opinion regarding the occurrence of the specified event, rather than the actual happening of the event itself. The judge acknowledged that while the underlying event needed to be sufficiently defined for the trustees or judges to decide whether it had transpired, the inclusion of the trustees' opinion as the decisive factor addressed potential challenges.
Jenkins J further explained that the testator's approach, by making the trustees' opinion the criterion, effectively removed potential difficulties related to evidential uncertainty. The judge recognised that the underlying event, though adequately defined, might involve questions of fact and degree, creating evidential uncertainty. However, by vesting the decision-making authority in the trustees, the testator mitigated these challenges and ensured a more practical and workable determination.
In summary, this case established the validity of the condition by highlighting the importance of the trustees' opinion and the testator's strategic choice to alleviate evidential uncertainties in the interpretation of the specified event.
The central issue before the court was whether this condition constituted a valid limitation upon the gift. The High Court's decision affirmed the validity of the condition, emphasising the significance of the trustees' opinion in determining Lady Coxen's interest.
Jenkins J, in delivering the judgment, underscored that the crux of the matter lay in the trustees' opinion regarding the occurrence of the specified event, rather than the actual happening of the event itself. The judge acknowledged that while the underlying event needed to be sufficiently defined for the trustees or judges to decide whether it had transpired, the inclusion of the trustees' opinion as the decisive factor addressed potential challenges.
Jenkins J further explained that the testator's approach, by making the trustees' opinion the criterion, effectively removed potential difficulties related to evidential uncertainty. The judge recognised that the underlying event, though adequately defined, might involve questions of fact and degree, creating evidential uncertainty. However, by vesting the decision-making authority in the trustees, the testator mitigated these challenges and ensured a more practical and workable determination.
In summary, this case established the validity of the condition by highlighting the importance of the trustees' opinion and the testator's strategic choice to alleviate evidential uncertainties in the interpretation of the specified event.
