FAMILY PROTECTION ACT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3993, 23 September 1930, Page 70

FAMILY PROTECTION ACT.

PATRICK LAFFEY’S WILL.

FURTHER PROVISION FROM THE ESTATE.

The following judgment was given by Mr Justice Kennedy in the Supreme Court on Tuesday morning in the matter of the will of Patrick Laffey, deceased. The case was between John Joseph Laffey (plaintiff) and John James Sheehy and James Kelleher (defendants): — The consents and requests given on behalf of or made by those affected have made it possible to make the following order, which is made accordingly:—(l) That the time for making an application under the Family Protection Act, 1908, be and the same is hereby extended in favour of the plaintiff up to the date of this order. (2) That the sum of £2OOO be paid by the defendants as the executors and trustees of the above-named deceased out of the estate of the abovenamed testator as a further provision for the plaintiff. (3) That the said sum of £2OOO is during the life of the widow of the above-named testator charged upon and. is deemed to be payable out of the ''residuary estate of the abovenamed testator. From and after the death of the said widow it is to be charged upon and to be deemed to be payable out of the three parts referred to in paragraph 8 of the will of the above-named testator as “my son’s share ” and the one part in the said paragraph 8 referred to as “ my daughter’s share ” is exonerated from the incidence of the payment of the said sum of £2OOO. (4) That the above-named defendants are hereby authorised to raise the sum of £2OOO for the purpose of paying in cash to the plaintiff the sura of £2OOO so charged as in paragraph (3) hereof provided, by mortgage of the real estate in the estate of the above-named testator and in particular by a mortgage of all that parcel of land, being part section 24, block XVI, in the city of Dunedin, known as Jackson’s Hotel, Princes street', in the said city of Dunedin, or any part or parts thereof for a term of three or five years, with interest at the rate of 6 per centum per annum, or at other the current rate for the time being, and to execute mortgages in substitution therefor upon the said security, and the same or any mortgages in substitution therefor to renew from time to time. (5) That the costs of all parties of and incidental to these proceedings, taxed as between solicitor and client, shall be paid as follows, namelyy"out of the income during the life of the widow of the above-named testator of the residuary estate of the above-named testator, and any sum not so paid during the life of the said widow shall be paid out of the said “my son’s share.” The costs of and incidental to the preparation and completion of the mortgage hereinbefore mentioned and any mortgage in substitution therefor and any renewals shall, if incurred during the lifetime of the widow of the above-named testator, be paid out of the income of the residuary estate of the above-named testator, and, if incurred after the death of the widow of the above-named testator, shall be charged upon and shall be payable out of the said “my son’s share.” (6) That leave is hereby reserved to any party to apply to the court for further or other directions as to and for leave to vary after the death of the widow of the above-named testator the method of securing the said sum of £2OOO or paying off opt of the said “my son’s share” the said sum so secured by mortgage. Mr Neill appeared for the plaintiff, Mr Hanlon, K.C., with him Mr Simpson, for Mary Ann Laffey and Margaret Ellen Tracey, Mr Irwin for unborn children and unborn remoter issue, and Mr Callan for the defendants.