header-logo header-logo

30 October 2015 / Edward Rowntree
Issue: 7674 / Categories: Features , Wills & Probate
printer mail-detail

Restricting an anomaly

web_rowntree

The court is making efforts to keep the DMC doctrine within its proper bounds, says Edward Rowntree

Earlier this year, the Court of Appeal opined for the first time in over 20 years on the subject of donatio mortis causa (DMC)—one of the most significant exceptions to the restrictions on both the transfer of real property and the formalities of executing wills ( Dubrey v King [2015] EWCA Civ 581, [2015] All ER (D) 105 (Jun)). A DMC is a gift of real or personal property made by D to R in the following circumstances: (i) D makes the gift because he anticipates death; (ii) D makes the gift on the understanding that if he dies, R will keep it; (iii) if D survives, he will get it back; (iv) D may revoke the gift at any time; and (v) if R predeceases D, D gets it back. It has been described as being of an “amphibious nature” having some characteristics of a gift inter vivos and some of a legacy.

Case history

It was not until Sen v Headley [1991] Ch 425, [1991]

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll