ABSTRACT
Mustill L. J. considered it legitimate to infer that the tsava’ah was intended to operate in the shadow of the English wills in two respects. First, the rights created by the English wills were to be those recognised by the mechanisms of English law. Secondly, the tsava’ah was designed to impose on various persons obligations in regard to the disposition of assets. The English court in the light of all the admissible evidence will then determine what the testator intended and will give effect to that intention so far as it is valid and effectual by English law. In so doing, the English court is applying English law and has recourse to evidence of foreign law merely for the purpose of ascertaining the testator’s intention. In Re Berger Sir Denys Buckley referred to the need for such expert evidence on the meaning and effect of technical terms in a foreign legal system.
