Gason v Rich

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 25 February 1887
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Date: 25 February 1887

CHANCERY DIVISION.

Appeal

GASON

and

RICH.

Moore v. Ulster Bank Ir. R. 11 Eq. 512.

Edwards v. Jones 1 M. & C. 227.

Blakely v. Brady 2 D. & W. 311.

Kekewich v. ManningENR 1 De G. M. & G. 176.

Lee v. MagrathUNK 10 L. R. Ir. 313.

Donaldson v. DonaldsonENR Kay, 711.

Milroy v. LordENR 4 De G. F. & J. 264.

Richards v. DelbridgeELR L. R. 18 Eq. 11.

Edwards v. JonesENR 1 My. & Cr. 226.

In re King; Sewell v. King 14 Ch. Div. 179.

Bridge v. BridgeENR 16 Beav. 322.

Gilbert v. OvertonENR 2 H. & M. 110.

Lambe v. OrtonENR 1 Dr. & Sm. 125.

Breton v. WoollvenELR 17 Ch. D. 416.

Moore v. MooreELR L. R. 18 Eq. 474.

Harding v. HardingELR 17 Q. B. D. 442.

West v. WestUNK 9 L. R. Ir. 121.

Re Way's Trusts 2 De G. J. & Sm. 365.

Milroy v. LordENR 4 De G. F. & J. 264.

Lee v. MagrathUNK 10 L. R. Ir. 313.

Chose in action — Voluntary assignment — Incomplete gift — Intention of donor.

VOL. XIX.] CHANCERY DIVISION. 391 GASON v. RICE Choses in action- Voluntary assignment-Incomplete gift-Intention of donor. A held certain bank shares in trust for his father B, under a written acknowledgment of the trust. B indorsed on the acknowledgment--" I transÂfer these shares to my daughter C, for her sole use and benefit." B also held two I 0 II's, one from A, the second from another person indebted to him. Upon each of these B indorsed-." I transfer the debt of £ to my daughter C, for her sole use and benefit." B signed these indorsements, and handed the acknowledgment and I 0 II's to C. There was no consideration for the trans-, fer. B did not give any notice of it to A or the debtor on foot of the second I 0 II, and continued till his death, five years later, to receive the dividends on the shares and the interest on A's I 0 U : Held, by the Master of the Rolls and the Court of Appeal (Sir M. Morris, C.J., and Fitz Gibbon and Barry, L.JJ.), that, although the indorsements, acÂcompanied by the delivery of the acknowledgment and I 0 U's, were capable, , of operating as equitable assignments, yet as it appeared, having regard to the evidence, and especially to B's receipt of the subsequent dividends and interest, that he did not intend at the time of the indorsement to divest himself absolutely of his property in the shares or debts, but attempted at most to effect a disposition to become operaÂtive only at his death, and in the meanwhile to be ambulatory and revocable, they did not constitute a complete gift enforcible in equity. ADJOURNED SUMMONS for the opinion of the Court on certain questions arising at Chambers, in the administration of the estate of Mr. John S. Rich, deceased. The material facts are fully stated in the judgment of the Master of the Rolls. Mr. George Wright, Q. C., and Mr. E. B. L. Maunsell, for the defendant Gertrude Isabella Rich. Serjeant Campion, Mr. A. S. Jackson, Q.C., and Mr. Robertson, for the defendant Colonel Frederick Henry Rich. THE MASTER OF THE ROLLS : This case comes before me on three questions, sent by the VoL. XIX. 2 H 392 LAW REPORTS (IRELAND). [L. It. I. M. R. Chief Clerk for my decision :-First, as to the £21,000 ; secondly, 1886. whether the defendant Gertrude Rich is entitled to six Provincial GA SON Bank shares, or whether same form part of, and should be returned RICH. -as, outstanding personal estate of the testator ; thirdly, whether two I 0 U's, one dated 29th January, 1875, of Frances Mary kGabbett to the testator, and the other dated 30th January, 1875, of the defendant Frederick Henry Rich to the testator, form part of and are to be returned as outstanding personal estate of the -testator, or are the property of the defendant Gertrude Rich. [Having discussed the evidence as bearing upon the first question (1), the Master of the Rolls proceeded :-] The second and third questions relate to the dealings by the testator with certain bank shares and I 0 U's, which are claimed by Miss Gertrude Isabella Rich as her property. It will be Observed that Miss Rich is the testator's daughter, and is one of the persons whom he was anxious to provide for. Her affidavit sets forth the transactions which form the subjects of the second and third questions in these words :-" I refer to my claim sent in to the executors in this matter, and in proof I produce the original I 0 U of the defendant Colonel Frederick Henry Rich, which is in the words and figures following : " I 0 II. I hereby acknowledge that Captain J. S. Rich has advanced me five hundred pounds. This acknowledgment cancels all former acknowledgÂments and. I 0 U's. I have given several, which Captain J. S. Rich states he has lost. All the I 0 II's and acknowledgments refer to the same sum. "'F. H. RICH. " 30th January, 1875.-£500.' Said I 0 U is indorsed in words and figures following:- " '1 transfer the debt (£500) to my daughter Gertrude Isabella Rich, for her sole use and benefit. " JNO. S. RICH, Woodlands, Castleconnell. " ' February 3rd, 1875.' And on which I 0 U, marked A, I have signed my name, and beg to refer." The affidavit then proceeds :-" I also produce the acknowledgment of the six Provincial Bank shares referred to in my said claim, which is written in the words and figures following :- (1) The decision upon the first question turned entirely upon facts. Vox,. XIX.] CHANCERY DIVISION. " ' I acknowledge to hold six shares of the Provincial Bank of Ireland, which belong to J. S. Rich, and promise to pay him whatever half-yearly dividends the Bank pays on said shares. This acknowledgment cancels acknowledgments to same effect, which J. S. Rich states he has lost. " F. H. RICH. " ' January 25th, 1875.' That acknowledgment is indorsed in words and figures following:Â" I transfer these six shares in the Provincial Bank to my daughter Gertrude Isabella Rich, for her sole use and benefit. " ' February 3rd, 1875.' " Jowl' S. RICH, Woodlands, Castleconnell. And to which acknowledgment marked with the letter B, I have signed my name and beg to refer." The...