Administration of justice

• Pages: 470-470

Laws, or any corresponding provision, applied to this case, I would still hold that the

legal estate was vested in the parties as trustees because An assent to the vesting of

realty must be in writing for the purpose of vesting the legal estate was vested in the

parties as trustees because a formal written assent (even if desirable, as appears

from Re Yerburgh (1928) W.N. 208) is not strictly necessary where the executors

and trustees are the same persons and the legal estate is therefore already at home in

its proper resting place.” - Per Unsworth, F.J. in Renner v. Renner Suit No. FSC

314/1960; (1961) 2 N.S.C.C. 125 at 126-127.

988-1000. Vesting assent.

“The law favours early vesting, and it would be wronging the doctor to say that he

must wait for ten years before the house can vest in him, for what would be the

position if he were to die in the interval? There is this besides; Raymond House is one

item of property; the doctor can use the dwelling-part as he pleases, for it is not

caught in the trust fund; and as for the direction in the will that this fund created for

ten years shall be fed partly from the rent accruing from the shop-part, it was not

meant to postpone the gift of Raymond House to the doctor and does not entitle the

personal representatives to delay the vesting assent, but only enables them to give it

subject to conditions which secure the rights of the trust fund.” - Per Bairamian,

J.S.C. in Bankole v. Williams Suit No. S.C. 535/1964; (1965) 4 N.S.C.C. 115 at 119.

Vol. 1: ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATE 470

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

See JUSTICE

Paras. 987-1000