References: Times 29-Mar-2002, Gazette 11-Apr-2002, [2002] EWHC 218 (Ch)
Links: Bailii
Coram: Mr Justice Etherton
Ratio: Land having been conveyed under the Act, and it no longer being needed as a school, it had to be decided to whom the land reverted.
Held: The tracing of beneficiaries had to be in the basis under section 2, that the land had never been so conveyed. It would so have passed not as a right of reverter, and therefore as part of the residuary estate, but rather as if it had been land in the estate, and passed as provided by the will as such. A right of reverter on the determination of a determinable fee was devisable under 3 of the 1837 Act
Statutes: School Sites Act 1841 2, Wills Act 1837 3
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
This case cites:
- Cited – In Re Cawston’s Conveyance and the School Sites Act 1841 CA ([1940] Ch 27)
The 1841 Act was intended to encourage land owners to make land available for educational purposes: ‘One can see that the provision with regard to reverter would have been and no doubt was considered by the Legislature to be a very useful . . - Cited – Dennis v Malcolm ([1934] Ch 244)
The court considered the way in which the 1841 Act might operate as to a reversion of the title. Clauson J said: ‘In my view it is plain that the deed is intended to operate and operate only under the [1841] Act, and the effect of dealing with the . . - Cited – Fraser and Another v Canterbury Diocesan Board Of Finance (No 1) CA (Times 09-Jan-01, Gazette 25-Jan-01, [2001] Ch 669, Bailii, [2000] EWCA Civ 460)
A grant of land was made under the 1841 Act in 1872 (after the 1870 Act) and the school had in 1874 been transferred to a school board under section 23 of the 1870 Act. The school closed permanently in 1992. The issue was whether reverter had . .
(This list may be incomplete)
Last Update: 02 April 2019
Ref: 168063
The post Rector of Wrington and The Bath and Wells Diocesan Board of Finance v Jenkinson and Others: ChD 26 Feb 2002 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.
