The third and last requirement of the in terrorem doctrine is that the threat must be idle. Both parties rely on Kent v. McKay, which states, The “threat” must be “idle”; that is the condition must be imposed solely to prevent the donee from undertaking that which the condition forbids. Therefore a provision which provides only for a bare forfeiture of the gift on breach of the condition is bad.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.