This cases states that Ben and John has written the same wills, where Kasim was the sole beneficiary of them both. However, due to the chain of …show more content…
The reason for it is that he gave the lawn mower to her in his life time and at that time, he was not aware that he might die. The words of his, ‘The chances of me coming back are remote,’ does not necessary has to be understood as he will die and that is the reason he will not come back.
It proves that Adaeze is entitled to possess the lawn mower and this property will pass to Adaeze as the inter vivos gift.
An inter vivos gift is opposite to donatia mortis causa, which means that a donee can receive a gift only after a death of a donor.
Donatia mortis causa has the three elements that must considered, whether a donor is entitled to it.
The first one is a contemplation of death. It means that a gift has to be made, only when a donor considers that he may die, though a death does not need to happen to a specific cause as it was showed in the case of Wilkes v Allington2, where the donor died from the different disease that he expected to die