STEP GRANDCHILDREN

Evening Post, Volume CII, Issue 37, 12 August 1921, Page 8

STEP GRANDCHILDREN

TAXATION OF LEGACIES

AN APPEAL DISMISSED

The question whether legacies to stepgrandchildren are to bo subject to succession duty at the rate of 2 percent, as if the legatees were grand-children,' or at' the rate of 10 per cent., has been decided by his Honour Mr. Justice Sim, Acting Chief Justice, in favour of the higher rate.

; The case in which judgment was delivered this morning was heard on Wednesday, Dr. P. 0. Andrew, of Ohawai, as executor of the will of the late Mrs. E. S. Andrew, appealed against the assessment of the Commissioner of Stamps of the succession duty on the estate of £46,960, which ,was left in equal shares to the grand-children of the deceased's husband. . These grandchildren were: not related by blood to the testatrix.' The Solicitor-General, Mr. MacGregor, appeared for the Commissioner of Stamps, and Mr. P. B. Cooke, with Mr. T. C. A. Hislop, for the appellant.

. The question to be determined, said his Honour, was whether or not the case came within the terras of section 92 of the Act of 1915. That section dealt with. the case of a successor who is a child] grandchild, or other descendent of the deceased. By virtue of section 2 of the Death Duties Act, the word "child," when used in the Act, unless a. contrary intention appeared, included a stepchild, and 'also included the ■ widow of a son or adopted son. The argument for' ,the appellant was that the word "grandchild".'as used in section 92 ought to be constrned in the Same way as including a ,istep-grandchild., and that v the grandchild of the late Mr., Andrew ought to be treated as the grandchildren of his widow. In support of this argument it was pointed out by Mr. Hislop that if the word grandchild was confined to a descendent of the testatrix, it was really redundant,, because such a relative came within the description of "other descendent of 1 the deceased." BuJ that appeared to be an unsafe ground for concluding that the word had been used in the Act in other than its ordinary sense, for the Legislature frequently used a great many unnecessary words to express its intention. Prima facie, the word ought to be construed in its ordinary sense as denoting a descendant of the testatrix, and there Was nothing in the context to show that it was used by the Legislature in any wider sense, or was intended to include any person other than a .descendent of the deceased. The definition of "child" contained in the Act, of 1909 1 must.be limited strictly, he thought, to the particular case with which it dealt and could not be ÜBed to justify the Court in giving an ( enlarged meaning . to .■" the word "grandchild." The (context, indeed, appeared to negative that construction. The term "other descendent of the deceased" showed that the only successors intended to have the benefit of that section were descendents of the deceased, except in the special case of a stepchild, or of the widow of . a son or adopted son. ' His Honour thought, therefore, that the grandchildren in question v'er,e not entitled to claim the benefit of section 92. It was contended, in the alternative, that 'they were at any rate relatives of the deceased. On this point, his Honour followed the decision of Mr. Justice Williams, that in this matter the term "relative" applied only to blood relatives. ' ' '..''■ ,s'The appeal'was therefore^'dismissed'P and the Commissioner's assessment upheld. ■ ■ ■•.':.■ ■;.' . .-