MENTAL DEFECTIVES ACT

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2785, 1 June 1916, Page 9

MENTAL DEFECTIVES ACT

INTERESTING POINT' OF LAW

.An interesting point of law and one .that seems to indicate the necessity for an amendment of the Mental Defectives Act of New Zealand, was'argued before His Honour Mr. Justice Hoskiug en Tuesday afternoon in proceedings between the Public Trustee, as executor of the. will of the late John Thomas Wren, of/.Tnvercargill, the plaintiff, and Agnes Wren, the widow of the deceased, and her infaut children dependants. Tho late Mr. Wren was in partnership in Invercargill with his brother, Edward Joseph Wren, and in 1913 was admitted as a patient to the Seacliff Mental Hospital, where he oontinued up to the date of his death on December 25, 1914. In 1913 the business of the partnership between the brothers was ordered to bo wound up .by the Court. By arrangement between the Public Trustee, on behalf of • the montal patient, and Mr. E. J. Wren, tho latter agreed, on February 14, 1914, to buy the share of his brother in the partnership business and assets, for the suni of .£2988 14s. 3d. Payment of this amount was inade by. instalments, and the salo completed and the partnership land trans, forred to Mr. E. J. Wren about June, 1915. The cash received by the Public Trustee from this salo was placed to tho credit of tho general account of tho patient, and not kept in a separate account, but mixed with other moneys belonging to the estate, and from such mixed fund various payments were made from time to time on account of the patient. By his will, made on August 2G, 1912, the said J. T..Wron devised to his wife for her life his share' of the land and premises 6ituato in Tay Street, Invercargill, of tho firm of Wren Brothers, arid after her death'devised the land .and premises to his children, and gave all the residue of his estate to his wife absolutely. His will concluded with the following proyi. sion: "If the other owners of the said lands and premises in Tay, Street, Invercargill, desire to sell tho same, I author, ise my executrix or other the executor or trustee for the time being to join in such sale and sell my said share, but not otherwise to sell tho same and' to invest tho proceeds of my share and apply tho income as tho income of such laud if not sold." The matter came before His Honour Mr. Justice Hosking in the shapo of an originating summons, asking the opinion of the Court as to whether or not the devise of the testator's share of the land and premises of the partnership had been adeemed by the sale thereof in the testator's lifetime, and, - in consc. qucnce. whether the proceeds of the solo of such share .went to the widow absolutely in the residuary gift under the will. The law of Now Zealand in this respect differs from that of England as the English Lunacy Act, 1890, provides that the lunatic and his representatives shall have_ the 6amo interest in any moneys arising from any salo of his property by order of the Court as they would havo-had in the property if no such sale had been made, and the surplus moneys shall be of the same nature as the property sold. A similar provision 6eems to bo required in the law of New Zealand to prevent cases of hardship. On the aigument Mr. 13. P. Hay appeared for the Public Trustee as representing the infant children and Mr. H. F. von Haast.for the widow. His Honour reserved his decision.