Fox v Armytage

In *Fox v Armytage*, the High Court of Australia considered a dispute concerning the interpretation of a will and the application of the rule against perpetuities. The primary issue before the court was whether a gift to a class of beneficiaries, contingent on a future event, offended the rule against perpetuities.

The court was required to determine whether the contingent gift to the grandchildren of the testator was void for remoteness. Specifically, it had to ascertain whether the vesting of the gift was certain to occur, if at all, within the perpetuity period. This involved an analysis of the terms of the will and the relevant legal principles governing the rule against perpetuities.

Hayne J, applying established principles, reasoned that the gift to the grandchildren was contingent upon them attaining the age of 25. As it was possible for a grandchild to be born after the death of the testator and for that grandchild to reach the age of 25 more than 21 years after the death of all relevant lives in being, the gift was void for remoteness. The court held that the rule against perpetuities requires that a contingent interest must vest, if at all, within a fixed period, and this condition was not met.