ARTICLE
16 March 2017

Wills Judgment Shows Welcome Pragmatism Over Property Inheritance

O
Ogier

Contributor

Ogier  logo
Ogier provides legal advice on BVI, Cayman, Guernsey, Irish, Jersey and Luxembourg law. Our network of locations also includes Beijing, Hong Kong, London, Shanghai, Singapore and Tokyo. Legal services for the corporate and financial sectors form the core of our business, principally in the areas of banking and finance, corporate, investment funds, dispute resolution, private equity and private wealth. We also have strong practices in the areas of employee benefits and incentives, employment law, regulatory, restructuring and corporate recovery and property. Our corporate administration business, Ogier Global, works closely with Ogier's partner-led legal teams to incorporate and administer a wide variety of vehicles, offering clients integrated legal and corporate administration services. We have the knowledge and expertise to handle the most demanding and complex transactions and provide expert, efficient and cost effective services to all our clients.
Jersey's Royal Court has ruled that a house and land in St Helier which were left in a will to a UK body with charitable status (the "Charity") which could not take ownership of them could pass to a company...
Jersey Wealth Management
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

Jersey's Royal Court has ruled that a house and land in St Helier which were left in a will to a UK body with charitable status (the "Charity") which could not take ownership of them could pass to a company set up to hold property on its behalf.

The will that gave rise to the case left the properties to the Charity, which was not capable of holding Jersey property, rather than to the UK company set up to hold property on its behalf, and which already owned Jersey property on that basis.

The UK company applied to the Royal Court to make a declaration that would enable it to take ownership of the property, as had been provided for in a previous will by the deceased, named in the judgment only as Mr D.

Evidence was heard which established that the intention of Mr D was that the Charity should benefit from his will. The Royal Court agreed – noting that the primary consideration was to give effect to the intentions of the deceased which should be ascertained from the language used in the will itself and the circumstances in which it was made – and made a declaration which implemented what had been accepted as reflecting Mr D's wishes.

Advocate Julie Melia, a partner at Ogier and head of the firm's Probate and Estates team, said that the decision showed welcome pragmatism.

"Although the will named the wrong beneficiary, the Royal Court felt able, with the assistance of the evidence that was produced, to take a pragmatic view and recognise the intentions of the deceased," she said.

"Jersey's law on the inheritance of immovable property is prescriptive, but the fact that the court was prepared to approach a question like this with the intentions of the deceased as a main consideration, is a source of comfort to anyone leaving a will."

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

See More Popular Content From

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More