LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 2113, 2 April 1914, Page 9

LAW REPORTS.

SUPREME COtfET,

THE STAMP DUTY ON AN ESTATE

His Honour the Chief Jastieo (Sir Robert Stout gave reserved judgment in the Supremo Court yesterday in a I caso Arthur Cyril Hcajclosoii and ethers. J versus tho Commissioner of Stamps—an appeal against tho deeisioii of the Commissioner'regarding stamp dirty pftyable on the estate'of Harriett Hannah Ran-. derson, deceased. . At tJtu hearing, Mr. : H. F. Von Haast appeared fotf appel-•; hints, and Mr. J. W. Saiiiwnd (SolitHor* 3 ra V for tlle respondent. flic iss\io turned on the- inter-preta-tion of certain words in tiie will of t?». testator, Harriett Hannah Haiidersefl. J lie question was wsicthe-j' sTeceasea , gave her property over absolutely to her Iwsband, John Richard Rauderam, or whether ho had been given only a life interest iu it. This latter interpretation was that which tho appelliiirt* (children of the testator) wished to have put upon tho will. Them was a clause in the will which seemed to impose a trust on the husband, John RMtderson, to apply the property' fco Ms own us.6 during his lifetime, but the baly circumstance apparently contemplated by the testator, under whiesh the property was to go to her children., was tho event ef her husband dyinir before her. The first paii of tho will staM e . "I givo ali my teal and per-senal property to my deaf hMsfemd, the said Johu Richard Sanderson, sfcis.o.lutely, and I appoint- tifjo said John Richard Randersoii the executor aud trusteo of this my- will." His Honour held that this meant ftat the property wbb given over absolutely to the husband, and that 13id jjiisuse of the word "trusteo" could itot alter tho effect of the gift. Hβ Ijeid, tetther, that the trust clffu-So _<m which Mr. Von Haast had based Ms contention did not cut dow:n the absolute gift to a life estate. His; Honour therefore upheld the decision of tiie- Coromfssipnej , of Stamps that the assessment' &f duty must be on the basis of a gift over of an absolute arid not en th& basis of.a life interest fiierfily. The appeal was dismissed, with £5 ss. costs. . ■