Rule Against Perpetuities - Historical Background

Historical Background

Property law
Part of the common law series
Types
  • Real property
  • Personal property
Acquisition
  • Gift
  • Adverse possession
  • Deed
  • Conquest
  • Discovery
  • Accession
  • Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property
  • Treasure trove
  • Bailment
  • License
  • Alienation
Estates in land
  • Allodial title
  • Fee simple
  • Fee tail
  • Life estate
  • Defeasible estate
  • Future interest
  • Concurrent estate
  • Leasehold estate
  • Condominiums
  • Real estate
Conveyancing
  • Bona fide purchaser
  • Torrens title
  • Strata title
  • Estoppel by deed
  • Quitclaim deed
  • Mortgage
  • Equitable conversion
  • Action to quiet title
  • Escheat
Future use control
  • Restraint on alienation
  • Rule against perpetuities
  • Rule in Shelley's Case
  • Doctrine of worthier title
Nonpossessory interest
  • Easement
  • Profit
  • Usufruct
  • Covenant
  • Equitable servitude
Related topics
  • Fixtures
  • Waste
  • Partition
  • Practicing without a license
  • Riparian water rights
  • Prior-appropriation water rights
  • Lateral and subjacent support
  • Assignment
  • Nemo dat
  • Conflict of property laws
  • Blackacre
Other common law areas
  • Contract law
  • Tort law
  • Wills, trusts and estates
  • Criminal law
  • Evidence

The rule has its origin in the Duke of Norfolk's Case of 1682. That case concerned Henry, 22nd Earl of Arundel (later the Duke of Norfolk), who had tried to create a shifting executory limitation so that one of his titles would pass to his eldest son (who was mentally deficient) and then to his second son, and another title would pass to his second son, but then to his fourth son. The estate plan also included provisions for shifting the titles many generations later, if certain conditions should occur.

When his second son, Henry, succeeded to one title, he did not want to pass the other to his younger brother, Charles. Charles sued to enforce his interest, and the court (in this instance the House of Lords) held that such a shifting condition could not exist indefinitely. The judges believed that tying up property too long beyond the lives of people living at the time was wrong, although the exact period was not determined until another case, Cadell v. Palmer, 150 years later.

The rule against perpetuities is closely related to another doctrine in the common law of property, the rule against unreasonable restraints on alienation. Both stem from an underlying principle or reference in the common law against restraints on property rights. However, while a violation of the rule against perpetuities is also a violation of the rule against unreasonable restraints on alienation, the reciprocal is not true. As one has stated, "The rule against perpetuities is an ancient, but still vital, rule of property law intended to enhance marketability of property interests by limiting remoteness of vesting." For this reason, another court has declared that the provisions of the rule are predicated upon "public policy" and thus "constitute non-waivable, legal prohibitions.

Read more about this topic:  Rule Against Perpetuities

Famous quotes containing the words historical and/or background:

    Some of us still get all weepy when we think about the Gaia Hypothesis, the idea that earth is a big furry goddess-creature who resembles everybody’s mom in that she knows what’s best for us. But if you look at the historical record—Krakatoa, Mt. Vesuvius, Hurricane Charley, poison ivy, and so forth down the ages—you have to ask yourself: Whose side is she on, anyway?
    Barbara Ehrenreich (b. 1941)

    They were more than hostile. In the first place, I was a south Georgian and I was looked upon as a fiscal conservative, and the Atlanta newspapers quite erroneously, because they didn’t know anything about me or my background here in Plains, decided that I was also a racial conservative.
    Jimmy Carter (James Earl Carter, Jr.)