King v Dubrey
The doctrine of donatio mortis causa must be kept within strict limits, and requires a gift made in contemplation of death in the near future for a specific reason.
Facts
June Fairbrother, an elderly woman, lived with her nephew, Kenneth King, who cared for her. On several occasions, she handed him the title deeds to her house and said that the house would be his when she died. She died some months later, leaving a will in favour of animal charities. Kenneth claimed the house as a donatio mortis causa.
Legal principle
The Court of Appeal held that there was no valid donatio mortis causa. Jackson LJ said that the doctrine is anomalous, and the courts should not allow it to be used as a way of getting round the formalities required for wills. The donor must contemplate her impending death in the near future, for a specific reason, such as a known illness, and not merely the general fact that everyone dies. June had not been contemplating death for any specific reason when she gave Kenneth the deeds. The court also emphasised that the donor must part with dominion over the property.
Related cases on formalities and constitution of trusts
- Re Brooks' Settlement Trusts [1939] Ch 993
- Cannon v Hartley [1949] Ch 213
- Choithram (T) International SA v Pagarani [2001] 1 WLR 1
- Fletcher v Fletcher (1844) 4 Hare 67
- Grey v IRC [1960] AC 1
- Hodgson v Marks [1971] Ch 892
- Mascall v Mascall (1984) 50 P & CR 119
- Milroy v Lord (1862) 4 De GF & J 264
Studying equity and trusts? Our tutors help you understand and apply cases like this in essays, problem questions and exams. Request a quote or browse our law notes.
This summary is for study and revision and is not legal advice. Although our case summaries are checked for accuracy, we do not guarantee that they are free from errors or omissions. Always read the full judgment for the court's reasoning.
