A document holograph of the granter, disposing completely and regularly of his whole heritable and moveable estate, was headed ‘Notes of intended settlement;’ the granter left no other testamentary writing. Held (aff. judgment of the Court of Session) that the terms of the title justified the admission of evidence prout de jure to confirm or to disprove the testamentary character of the document, and that, the evidence so led being neutral in its result, the ambiguity of the title was not sufficient to show that the document was not a final expression of the granter’s will; and the document sustained accordingly as a valid testamentary writing.
Lord Chancellor Selborne, Lords O’Hagan, Blackburn, and Watson
[1882] UKHL 688, 19 SLR 688
Bailii
Scotland
Updated: 25 January 2021; Ref: scu.637741 br>
The post Whyte v Hamilton: HL 15 Jun 1882 appeared first on swarb.co.uk.