ADOPTED SON’S RIGHTS

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23740, 11 September 1942, Page 7

ADOPTED SON’S RIGHTS

OF 7 BENEFIT ■ -UNDER A WILL ' ARGUMENT IN COURT OF APPEAL (P.A.) WELLINGTON, fitpt Whether an adopted sonhasa right to take a benefit under a will la being artued in the Appeal Court to-day. In toe, case of Harold Ewart Holme*, of Napier, insurance inspector,- against the .Public Trustee and Phyllis Asenath Eagles, of Petone, married woman. James Hawkln Jackson, a retired hotelkeeper, died on December 87, 1018, leaving his residuary estate to his daughter, Nina Mary Holmes, during her lifetime,* and after her death to such of her children as attain the age of 21. The will was made on December 13< Ul2, mq on September 25. IBM, the daughter who had one child, now Phyllis , Asenath Eagfes, adopted the appellant, Holmes, under an order made'by a stipendiary magistrate. ■ '' '' In the subsequent Supreme Court case. Mr Justice Smith held that by virtue of the adoption order the adopted child is deemed, in law, the child of the adopting'parents. Nevertheless, section 21 of the Infants Act, 1908. imposes specific restriction on the right ol in adopted child to take property in the same way as natural children of ■an adopting parent. Here, is the will which contained the gift for the daughter s children was made before the adoption order, and codicils subsequent to the order did not refer to the gift, Mr Justice Smith held that the claim of the adopted son was barred. From this Judgment an appeal Is made, and argument is proceeding to-day. .