Murray v Murray and Scanlon

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 13 July 1939
• Date: 13 July 1939
• Court: High Court

(H.C.),

Murray

and

Murray and Scanlon

Money deposited payable "on the receipt or endorsement of them, or of any one or more of them" - Death of depositor - Claim by personal representative -Rebuttal of presumption of resulting trust -Whether a declaration of trust - Admissibility of evidence - Effect of requisition made in writing by depositor to the bank for the deposit receipt -Absolute assignment of a chose in action by depositor to the three persons named in deposit receipt - Express notice to the bank of the absolute assignment - Joint tenancy between the three persons named in deposit receipt - Severance of joint tenancy by death of depositor - Right of survivors to the fund - Legal character of the co-ownership of a chose in action represented by a deposit receipt.

J.M., an old man, returned from America to Donegal in 1926 with a sum of £300. He was received into the house of his nephew and niece, the defendants. From time to time from 1927 J.M. made various deposits and withdrawals of sums of money with, and from, a bank in his own name. He continued living with the defendants, from whom he received great kindness, and in April, 1931, he stated that he wished to make some return to them. On April 18th, 1931, there was on deposit in his name £300, and he sent for the bank manager, cancelled the existing deposit receipt and signed a requisition for a new one for the same sum in the names of himself and the two defendants "to be payable on the receipt or endorsement of them, or of any one or more of them." J.M. died intestate in 1934, and his personal representative issued an equity civil bill claiming that the money so deposited in the three names formed part of the assets of the deceased and that the defendants held the same in trust for his estate. It was proved in evidence that at the time of taking out the deposit receipt J.M. had intended to benefit the defendants, and that on two occasions after April 18th, 1931, one of the defendants had cashed the deposit receipt in his own name, withdrawn the interest and relodged the capital sum in the same three names. There was no evidence as to how he had disposed of the interest. It was further proved that after the death of J.M. the defendants had cashed the deposit receipt. The Circuit Court Judge decided that, though satisfied that J.M. intended solely to benefit the...