Estates - Hypos (validity) Flashcards

(11 cards)

1
Q

The land in the valley to Charley on his 21st birthday (he is 18).

A

Charley gets a fee simple, vested in possession with conditions precedent.

If he is not 21 at the time of grant the grant fails (gap in seisin)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

The home to Cali in trust for Brian. (instrument is a will)

A

Cali is the feoffee to uses and holds legal title vested in possession.

Brian is the cestuit que use and hold equitable title.

Because this is a will, the Statute of Uses doesn’t apply.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

The home to A in trust for B (instrument is a grant).

A

The statute of uses would operate here, and Brian would get a legal fee simple vested in possession.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

The land to Carmella, provided she doesn’t marry that good-for-nothing Tony

A

Words of condition - defeasible conditions subsequent

Carmella gets a conditional fee simple, vested in possession, conditioned by a defeasible condition subsquent with a conditional right of re-entry favouring the grantor.

Validity:

  • ‘good for nothing’ is a vague term: which TOny are they talking about (Sifton)
  • Restricting right to marry may violate public policy (Verolin)

If invalid, the defeasible condition would be struck and the grant made absolute.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

(in a will) The home to and unto the use of Tyler for the benefit of Hetty and any other grandkids 21 years or older.

A

Statute of uses is in play because this is a will, but the testator has employed a ‘use on use’ term to get around it.

Tyler holds legal fee simple, vested in posession.

Hetty and any other 21 year old grandchildren hold equitable fee simple vested in possession for Hetty.

Legal remainder rules do not apply to the equitable title, so other grandkids inherit equitable title as soon as they reach 21, regardless of whether or not they were 21 at the execution of the will.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

“I give everything to my spouse, and whatever is left when she dies equally to our three children”

A

Under Walker, and statute, spouse gets a fee simple. The remainder is void (remainder rule 1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

To A for life, then to B when B turns 21 (B is currently 8)

A

A gets a pur sa view life estated, vested in possession.

B has a fee simple remainder, limited by a condition precedent.

If A dies before B turns 21, under legal remainder rule 2 (no gaps in seisin) the grant fails and the estate has a reversion vested in interest.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

To Sam for life provided she keeps it real, then to Mike.

A

Words of condition - defeasible conditions subsequent.

Sam gets a pur sa via contingent life estate vested in possession, with a contingent right of re-entry with a possibility of reverter to the estate or remainder to Connor.

Normally a reverter to the grantor would void the remainder, but under 27(1) of the Real Property act this construction is permissible.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Everything to my children (wife is 7 months pregnant when the will is executed).

A

section 13 of the Conveyancing Act sets the presumption to fee simple.

The kids get a fee simple, vested in possession.

Normally all grantees must fulfill the condition at time of grant, but unborn children at the time of grant provided they were in the womb are ‘children’ for this purposes (Reeve)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

The estate to Meadow, on the condition that she don’t marry Noah

A

Words of condition - defeasible conditions subsequent.

Meadow gets a conditional fee simple vested in possession, conditioned by a defeasible condition subsequent with a conditional right of re-entry.

The term is likely void for violating public policy - restrictions on marriage (Verolin) and racism (Canada Trust, Ramsden)

For a defeasible condition, this removes the condition and the grant becomes absolute.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

I hereby leave my estate to Dalhousie to set up a scholarship to the use of mature students, until they give money to someone rich.

A

Words of duration - detereminable limitation

Dalhousie gets a conditional legal fee simple, in trust for future mature students. Conditioned by determinable limiation with a vested in interest possibility of reverter.

The term is likely void for vagueness. “Cool people” isn’t going to cut it - which means the grant fails.

Because it establishes a trust out of general charitable intend the doctrine of cy pres may save it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly