The testator left a life interest in the residue of his estate to his wife, directing that upon her death, the residue be divided equally between his son and daughter, 'per stirpes'.
The son predeceased the life tenant, leaving his estate to his second wife.
The application judge held that the phrase 'per stirpes' indicated an intention to benefit the son's children, rather than his estate or the surviving daughter.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that while a gift to named children 'per stirpes' can be contradictory, in this context it conveyed the testator's intention to benefit his children's children if either child predeceased the life tenant.
