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.
The clause became part of contractual drafting in response to common law rule developed by the courts known as the rule against perpetuities. [note 1] That rule provided that any future disposition of property must vest within "a life in being plus 21 years". The rule generally affects two types of transactions: trusts and options to
The Perpetuities and Accumulations Act 2009 (c. 18) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that reforms the rule against perpetuities. The Act resulted from a Law Commission report published in 1998. [3] It abolishes the rule against perpetuities in most non-trust contexts, such as easements. [3]
The report had also proposed changes in law: a "rule against perpetuities" to limit the lives of non-institutional foundations, 10–25 years, a denial of tax exemption to a foundation holding more than 5%-10% of any business' capital or securities, and a ban on using foundation funds to support "socialism, collectivism or any other form of ...
In economics and political economy, ... Rule against perpetuities; Rule in Shelley's Case; ... Marx notes that under Feudal Law, peasants were legally entitled to ...
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.
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 ...
See rule against perpetuities—each rule varies by jurisdiction. Mortmain was a key underlying interdiction in legal history, contextualising much early case law. The decision of Thornton v Howe (1862) 31 Beav 14 held that a trust for publishing the writings of Joanna Southcott [7] was charitable, being for the "advancement of religion".