(2) Having found that the bequest vested in him absolutely, the question arises as to whether or not the testator is able to impose restrictions on the mode and manner in which the beneficiary is entitled to receive the funds. The wishes of the testator are not enforceable. While the testator has indicated an intention that no money be given to the beneficiary but that goods be sent to him instead, such wish is unenforceable. The courts have always leaned against imposition of restrictions on an absolute vested interest. As stated in Wharton v. Masterman, [1895] A.C. 186, per Lord Davey, at page 198: As a necessary consequence of the conclusion that a gift had vested, that the enjoyment of it must be immediate on a beneficiary becoming sui juris, and could not be postponed until a later day unless the testator had made some other destination of the income during the intervening period.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.