TRANSCRIPT OF DEEMSTER CORRIN'S EXTEMPORE CONTEMPORANEOUS
JUDGMENT DELIVERED ON 3IST MAY 1996
MARTIN MOORE - KATZ (CA 1989/10)

---------------------------------

I will answer question 1 as to whether or not Sections 35 and 38 of the Trustee Act 1961 render the retirement of George Ramsey Moore void or valid.

The preliminary point arises out of an action between the Defendant and the Third Party, Mr Katz and Mr. Moore.

In these proceedings, Mr Katz is in effect the Plaintiff and Mr Conti appears for him. He claims contribution relating to the settlement of the claim made against him by his children arising out of the estate of his late mother, M.H.S. Katz who died in January 1975.

Under the Will there were three Trustees appointed, namely the husband - W.E. Katz, the widower - W.R.S. Katz, the son and G.R.M. Moore, the Advocate. They acted as Trustees. Mrs Katz residuary estate was left on Trust for W.E. Katz with a life interest. The family at that stage lived in the Isle of Man.

On the death of W.E. Katz, half of the estate went to W.R.S. Katz and half to the children of W.R.S. Katz i.e. Mrs Katz's grandchildren. In 1975 there were two children of W.R.S. Katz.

In 1981 W.R.S. Katz and W.E. Katz went to live in Canada. W.R.S. Katz divorced from his wife. W.R.S. Katz remarried. He then subsequently had three children in Canada, two children were natural children and the third child was adopted.

I have previously determined the entitlement of the Canadian children under their grandmothers Will. I held the adopted child was not to benefit but the other two would benefit even though one of them was "en Ventre sa Mere" at the time of W.E. Katz's death.