CORAM

MAIIMUDE MOHAMMED, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

UDOMA

SOWEMIMO

PARTIES

FATAYO OJULE & 5 ORS. APPELLANTS

B. A. FATOLA OKOYA . RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The defendant/respondent are grand children of the testator, they were given a portion of one of the deceased property intervivos. Upon the death of the deceased, the plaintiffs institute this action claiming that they are the beneficiaries of the un-devised part of the building given to the defendants, being part of the part o estate of the deceased and covered by the will.

HELD

The court held that the appellants are neither in locus parentis to the testator nor the inter vivos gift of part of the property to them extinguish the residuary clause as contained in the will made by the testator, in this light their claims cannot stand.

ISSUES

The complain generally that the facts and circumstances given in evidence in the case warranted an order to the effect that the residuary clause had adeemed, and that the defendant should have been adjudged disentitled to any further share under the Will in whatever is left of the property situate at and known as No.34, Denton Street, Ebute-Metta.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

Re Tussaud’s Estate, Tussaud v. Tussaud (1878) 9 Ch. D. 363).|Ex parte Pye 34 ER 271 at p. 274|Re Shields Courbould-Ellis v. Dales (1912) 1 Ch.D. 591).

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Halsbury’s Laws of England 3rd edition|

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT