On X's death, G has a:
fee simple (because X has not said anything to displace the presumption of a fee simple grant
under s 31 SA Wills Act)
absolute (no super-added clause cutting short the estate)
contingent (in order to be entitled, (a) G must need the land for educational purposes
the fee simple must not be vested in B or C)
in remainder (enjoyment of the land is postponed to the contingency & the prior estates).
Once G certifies that it needs the land for educational purposes,
B & C do not marry within
5 years of X's death
they are not married at the time of either's death, the estate becomes vested
goes into possession
when A dies. When G gets a vested FS absolute in possession, the settlement is
If the contingencies are not fulfilled, then the fee simple is simply not given away. The fee simple must
revert back to X, the grantor. Since X is dead, X's residual beneficiary Y gets the land.
Variations in clause
Assume that G now has a vested fee simple in possession.
There is a limiting clause that cuts the fee simple short. The word "until" in the clause is a word of
time, which indicates a determinable
interest. The clause is not void, as it is not illegal, immoral,
manipulative, restrictive of alienation, vague or uncertain.
When G ceases to use the land for educational purposes, the determinable fee simple is
to the grantor (or in the case of a will, his executor). The
grantor/executor has a possibility of reverter
There is a limiting clause which requires G to use the land for educational purposes. This clause is
not void under public policy or uncertainty grounds.
The word "provided" in the clause is not a word of time, thus indicating a conditional
if G uses the land for other purposes, it breaches the condition subsequent, and gives the grantor
(or in the case of a will, his executor) a right to repossess. The grantor/executor has a right of re-
There is a restraint on alienation clause. It is probably void under public policy grounds. The effect
of the void clause on the gift depends on whether the fee simple is determinable or conditional.
The clause contains the phrase "so long as". This may be interpreted as a phrase of time, thus
indicating a determinable fee simple
. Since the clause is void under public policy grounds, and a
determining limitation is part of the grant itself, the whole fee simple gift fails (
Zapletal v Wright
On the other hand, "so long as" may not be a phrase of time, thus indicating a fee simple subject to
a condition subsequent
. According to
Zapletal v Wright
, a void condition subsequent clause is
simply struck out, leaving behind a fee simple absolute. The gift does not fail.
No further gift is possible after a vested FS absolute.
Contingent estates must always be in remainder. Watch out for the gap.
Implicit contingency on the fee simple not vesting in others.
A reversion is the grantor's residue interest after he has granted away some lesser interest to
It exists when the grantor has not given away his FS
Reversioner always has a
vested interest. If contingent, he has technically given it away
Elaborate on how a contingent & in remainder estate becomes vested & in possession.