For this reason, I am reluctant to cast aside the two above-noted decisions, unless more recent authority indicates they are in error. The decision of Hicks v. McClure (1922), 1922 CanLII 9 (SCC), 64 S.C.R. 361, is not determinative of this issue. It serves only to show that a mortgage which was given in the circumstances of that case to secure the purchase price, served as a substitute for the actual property described in the will and, therefore, the bequest of the life estate had not adeemed. It does not bear at all upon the question of whether a bequest of the remainder survives the ademption of the life estate which is the issue here.
"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.