Unborn Persons, Perpetuity & Vested vs Contingent Interests — KSLU Property Law Notes
Unborn Persons, Perpetuity & Vested vs Contingent Interests
A transfer for the benefit of an unborn person (s.13) is valid only if the whole remaining interest is given to the unborn person (no life estate to him) and is preceded by a prior life interest. The rule against perpetuity (s.14) forbids tying up property beyond the life/lives in being + the minority of the ultimate beneficiary — vesting cannot be postponed beyond a life in being plus 18 years. The distinction between vested and contingent interests is decisive for transferability and survival:
| Vested interest (s.19) | Contingent interest (s.21) | |
|---|---|---|
| Depends on | An event certain to happen (or only fixes time of enjoyment) | An event that may or may not happen |
| Right | Present, fixed right; enjoyment may be postponed | Right arises only on the contingency |
| On death of holder | Passes to heirs | Fails (does not pass) unless contingency met |
| Law leans | In favour of vesting (Rajes Kanta Roy v. Santi Debi) | — |