Re Ryan's Estate. Maher v Harte Barry and Another

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 19 June 1960
• Date: 19 June 1960
• Court: High Court

In re Ryan's Estate. Maher v. Harte Barry and Another

In the Matter of the Proceeds of the Sale of the Lands the Subject Matter of Folio 584 County of Tipperary, And In the Matter of the Estate of Matthew Ryan, and in the Matter of the Estate of John Ryan, And In the Matter of the Estate of Kate, otherwise Katie, Ryan,MICHAEL F. MAHER

Plaintiff

and

HENRY HARTE BARRY and MARY ANNE LEDWIDGE

Defendants.

Limitation of actions - Registered land - Death of owner intestate - Entry of personal representative into possession with two fellow next-of-kin - Other next-of-kin abroad - Trusteeship of personal representative - Passage of twenty years - Right to refuse claims of absent next-of-kin - Exclusion by personal representative in possession of next-of-kin in possession from acquiring interest in shares of absent next-of-kin - Law of Property Amendment Act, 1860 (23 & 24 Vict., c. 38), s. 13.

M. R., a registered owner of lands, died a widower and intestate in 1915, survived by nine children, his next-of-kin. Of these children, J., M. and K.went into possession of the lands. The others all emigrated and never subsequently made any claim to the lands. J. took out a grant of administration to M. R.'s estate in 1916. M. died intestate and a spinster in 1919 and K. took out a grant to her estate in 1921. J. and K. remained and worked the farm together until J. died in March, 1955; K. died in November, 1955. On a summons for directions by the personal representative of M. R. junior, an emigrant son of the deceased registered owner, it was

Held by Dixon J. 1, that J. and K. remained on the lands in their personal capacities and in their capacities as personal representatives;

2, That J. was trustee for all the next-of-kin and so prevented K. from acquiring against the absent next-of-kin;

3, That K. was trustee for M.'s share in the same way;

4, That after twenty years J. was entitled to reject the claims of any of the absent next-of-kin; and K. could do likewise with regard to M.'sshare;

5, That the benefit of this power to refuse claims enured to J. alone; and to K. alone with regard to M.'s share;

6, Consequently, after twenty years, J. was entitled to the distributive shares of all the absent next-of-kin in addition to his own, and to his distributive share of the share of M.; and K. was entitled to her own distributive share and to M.'s share, less J.'s share of the latter.

Per Dixon J.:—"It is not so much a question of interests having been acquired as of rights having been lost. I do not wish to answer the questions in a way which would suggest that the Limitation Acts effected a transfer of property."

Summary Summons.

The plaintiff, Michael F. Maher, brought this summons as personal representative of Matthew Ryan, deceased, to determine questions arising on the administration of the...