The Attorney-General v Riall and Another

JurisdictionIreland
JudgeK. B. Div.
Judgment Date12 January 1906
CourtKing's Bench Division (Ireland)
Date12 January 1906
The Attorney-General.
and
Riall And Another (1).

K. B. Div.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE KING's BENCH DIVISION

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL,

AND BY

THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.

1906.

Revenue — Succession duty — Policy of life assurance — Premiums — Payment of — Marriage settlement — Predecessor — Disposition — Succession Duty Act 1853 (16 & 17 Vict. c. 51), ss. 2, 13, 17 — Customs and Inland Revenue Act, 1881 (44 Vict. c, 12), s. 38 — Customs and Inland Revenue Act,1889 (52 Vict. c. 7), s. 11.

Held, that C was not a “predecessor” within the meaning of sect. 2 of the Succession Duty Act, 1853, and that succession duty at the rate of £10 percent. in respect of a moiety of the proceeds of the said policy of insurance, as upon a succession from C, was not payable under sections 2 and 13 of the same Act.

Information on the Revenue side of the King's Bench Division claiming succession duty.

By an indenture, dated the 23rd September, 1850, and made between Mathew Henry Sankey of the first part, Mary Charlotte Roper of the second part, Charlotte Roper of the third part, the Rev. John Thomas Whitestone, Samuel Garrett, Thomas Johnston, and William Sankey, of the fourth part (being a settlement made in contemplation of a marriage then intended between the said

Mathew Henry Sankey and Mary Charlotte Roper), two several sum of £1500 and £2000, late Irish currency, to which the said Mary Charlotte Roper was then entitled in possession, and also sum of £4000, like currency, to which the said Mary Charlotte Roper was entitled in reversion on the death of the said Charlotte Roper, and the securities representing the said several sums, were, for the considerations therein mentioned, assigned and transferred by the said Mary Charlotte Roper to the said Rev. John Thomas Whitestone, Samuel Garrett, Thomas Johnston, and William Sankey, upon trust (inter alia) to permit and suffer the said Charlotte Roper and her assigns to receive and take to her own use during her life the yearly interest or dividends, or other annual produce of the said sums of £2000 and £1500 in like manner as she was then entitled to receive during her life the annual produce of the said sum of £4000, and from and after the death of the said Charlotte Roper, in case the said Mathew Henry Sankey should be then living, to permit and suffer him to receive and take the yearly interest, dividends, or annual produce of the said sums of £4000, £2000, and £1500 during his life, or until he should become bankrupt or insolvent, or take or apply to take, the benefit of any Act for the relief of insolvent debtors, or make any assignment for the benefit of his creditors, as therein more particularly mentioned.

The marriage between the said Mathew Henry Sankey and Mary Charlotte Roper was duly solemnized after the execution of the said indenture.

Mary Charlotte Sankey died on the 7th October, 1851.

By indenture dated the 1st February, 1853, made between the said Mathew Henry Sankey, of the first part, Mehetabel Roe, of the second part, the said Charlotte Roper, of the third part, and Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott, of the fourth part (being a settlement made in contemplation of a marriage then intended between the said Mathew Henry Sankey and the said Mehetabel Roe), reciting that on the treaty for the said marriage the said Charlotte Roper agreed to assign her interest in the annual proceeds, interest, or dividends of the said sums of £2000 and £1500, to the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott, during the life of the said Mathew Henry Sankey, the said Charlotte Roper reserving to herself the right of again receiving the said dividends and interest in the event of her surviving the said Mathew Henry Sankey, the said dividends or other annual produce of the said several sums to be held upon the trusts thereinafter mentioned, and that the said Mathew Henry Sankey had also agreed to transfer and make over all his estate and interest of and in the annual interest and dividends, or annual produce of the said last-mentioned sums, and also of in and to a certain policy of assurance on his own life for the sum of £4000 in the Guardian Assurance Office of London, dated the 25th day of January, 1853, and subject to the annual premium of £85 3s. 4d. to the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott upon the trusts thereinafter expressed, the said Mathew Henry Sankey, for the considerations therein mentioned, granted and assigned unto the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott the said policy of assurance, with all and every sums or sum of money thereby secured, and all benefit and advantages to arise therefrom, to hold the same upon the trusts thereinafter mentioned; and the said Mathew Henry Sankey and Charlotte Roper granted, assigned, and made over unto the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott all their respective interests during the life of the said Mathew Henry Sankey in and to the yearly interest or dividends or other annual produce of the said sums of £2000 and £1500, and in and to the interest, dividends, or annual proceeds of the sum of £3251 11s. 3d. Government 31/4 Stock, in which said two sums were then invested, and of the investments from time to time representing the same, to hold the same upon trust during the life of the said Mathew Henry Sankey, without prejudice to the right of the said Charlotte Roper to receive the interest, dividends, or annual produce thereof, for her own use after his death, in case she should survive him; and it was thereby declared that the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott should hold the premises so assigned to them upon trust from time to time, to call for and receive payment of the said interest, dividends, or annual proceeds, and to pay thereout in the first instance the said annual premiums of £85 3s. 4d. and such other moneys, if any, as might become payable for keeping on foot the said policy on the days and at the times when same ought to be paid, and in the next place to pay and reimburse themselves all costs and expenses attendant on, or incidental to, the execution of the said trusts, and lastly to pay over the surplus thereof unto the said Mathew Henry Sankey and his assigns; and it was thereby declared and agreed that the said policy of assurance should be held by the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott, upon trust during the life of the said Mathew Henry Sankey, to pay the annual premiums thereon from time to time as same should become due, and after the death of the said Mathew Henry Sankey, so soon as the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott should realise the amount of the same, and subject to the power thereon given to them of paying costs and expenses thereout, and of re-investment, to pay the yearly income, interest, dividends, or annual produce unto the said Mehetabel Roe, in case she should survive the said Mathew Henry Sankey, during her life, and after her decease upon trust for the children of the said intended marriage as therein mentioned with divers remainders over. The said indenture contained a covenant by the said Mathew Henry Sankey with the said Richard John Roe and John Moore Abbott for the payment by him of the annual sum of £85 3s. 4d., and such other moneys (if any) as might become payable for keeping on foot the said policy on the days on which the same ought respectively to be paid, as therein more particularly mentioned.

The marriage between the said Mathew Henry Sankey and Mehetabel Roe...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Attorney General v Biggs
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 11 February 1907
    ...J. L. (1) Before Johnson, Gibson, and Kenny, JJ. (1) I. R. 9 Eq. 553. (1) I. R. 9 Eq. 553. (2) 30 Beav. 75. (3) 32 L. R. Ir. 574. (4) [1906] 2 I. R. 122. (5) Ll. & G. (temp. Sugden), (1) 51 L. J., Ch. 511. (2) [1905] 1 I. R. 252. (3) 56 L. T. (N. S.) 611. (4) I. R. 9 Eq. 553. (1) I. R. 9 Eq......
  • Richardson and Others v Revenue Commissioners
    • Ireland
    • King's Bench Division (Ireland)
    • 29 June 1909
    ...[1900] 1 Q. B. 442. (3) [1907] A. C. 19. (4) [1904] 1 K. B. 165. (5) [1901] 2 I. R. 67. (1) [1907] A. C. 19. (1) [1901] 2 I. R. 67. (2) [1906] 2 I. R. 122. (1) [1907] A. C. at p. (2) [1901] 2 I. R. 67. (3) [1904] 1 K. B. 165. (1) [1907] A. C. at p. 26. (1) [1897] A. C. 145. (2) [1907] A. C.......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT