Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The rule against perpetuities serves a number of purposes. First, English courts have long recognized that allowing owners to attach long-lasting contingencies to their property harms the ability of future generations to freely buy and sell the property, since few people would be willing to buy property that had unresolved issues regarding its ownership hanging over it.
Unless a defeasible estate is clearly intended, modern courts will construe the language against this type of estate. Three types of defeasible estates are the fee simple determinable, the fee simple subject to an executory limitation or interest, and the fee simple subject to a condition subsequent. A life estate may also be defeasible.
Executory interests are subject to the rule against perpetuities, which disqualifies any interest that can vest more than twenty-one years after the death of every party who was living at the time the interest was created. However, if all of the potential vesting beneficiaries are named, the rule will never be violated.
Property law can be complex and arcane, even for lawyers and judges. The rule against perpetuities is an example of how older property laws can influence how families transfer and inherit property ...
Under the common law such restraints are void as against the public policy of allowing landowners to freely dispose of their property. Perhaps the ultimate restraint on alienation was the fee tail , a form of ownership which required that property be passed down in the same family from generation to generation, which has also been widely abolished.
Duke of Norfolk's Case (1682) 3 Ch Cas 1; 22 ER 931 is an important legal judgment of the House of Lords that established the common law rule against perpetuities.The case related to establishing inheritance for grandchildren of Henry Howard, 22nd Earl of Arundel including grandchildren who were not yet born.
The Rule in Shelley's Case is a rule of law that may apply to certain future interests in real property and trusts created in common law jurisdictions. [1]: 181 It was applied as early as 1366 in The Provost of Beverly's Case [1]: 182 [2] but in its present form is derived from Shelley's Case (1581), [3] in which counsel stated the rule as follows:
The focus on vesting is important in many states because contingent remainders (and certain other future interests) are invalidated if they might vest after the period defined by the Rule Against Perpetuities (RAP). [14] The Rule Against Perpetuities traditionally requires an interest to vest "if at all, not later than twenty-one years after ...