Definition
A contingent use is a future use of land, created under the Statute of Uses (1536), whose vesting depends upon the occurrence of a condition or the ascertainment of a person not yet identified or in existence at the time the use is created. Like a contingent remainder, it does not take effect immediately but waits upon some future event or condition precedent. If that condition is never satisfied, the use never vests.
Contingent uses arose as a product of equity and were then brought into the legal estate structure by the Statute of Uses, which executed uses — converting equitable interests into legal title. A contingent use, once the condition was satisfied, would be executed by the Statute into a legal estate. Before satisfaction of the condition, the interest remained inchoate.
---
Common Confusion
Contingent uses are frequently conflated with contingent remainders, and the confusion is not merely terminological — it has structural legal consequences. Both depend on a condition for vesting, but the mechanisms differ. A contingent remainder operates entirely within common law property rules: it requires a supporting freehold estate, must vest (if at all) before or at the termination of the preceding estate, and is destructible. A contingent use, operating through the Statute of Uses, was originally thought to be free from some of these common law limitations — particularly destructibility. Courts and commentators over time resolved much of this distinction by treating future uses that functioned as remainders as subject to the same rules as contingent remainders. The practical collapse of the distinction is addressed directly in the Rapalje & Lawrence entry below.
---
Core Elements
For a contingent use to be valid:
1. A grantor conveys legal title to a feoffee to uses (the trustee under the pre-Statute framework).
2. The use is limited to arise in favor of a person, or upon a condition, not presently certain.
3. The Statute of Uses, where applicable, stands ready to execute the use into a legal estate once the contingency is resolved.
4. Where the future use takes the form of a remainder, it must satisfy the common law remainder rules: a vested freehold estate must precede it, and the remainder must vest either during the supporting estate or at the moment of its termination.
---
Why It Matters in Research
This term is almost entirely historical. Researchers will encounter contingent uses in three primary contexts: (1) reading pre-19th-century conveyancing instruments, particularly English and early American deeds that used complex use-on-use and remainder structures; (2) tracing the doctrinal genealogy of equitable future interests and trusts; and (3) understanding how the destructibility of contingent remainders did or did not apply to future uses.
The critical navigational point is that the Statute of Uses was never enacted uniformly in American jurisdictions, and several states — most notably New York through its 19th-century real property reforms — abolished or substantially displaced the Statute and the use-remainder architecture that accompanied it. In those jurisdictions, searching for contingent uses as a live doctrine will be fruitless; the relevant successor concepts are equitable future interests in trust and statutory provisions governing vesting.
Researchers working in English chancery records or early colonial and post-colonial conveyancing records should be alert to the fact that instruments creating contingent uses often do not use that phrase. The structure — a conveyance to uses with a future limitation dependent on a condition — signals the concept regardless of the label applied.
The term also matters for understanding the development of the Rule Against Perpetuities, which emerged in part as a judicial response to the perceived evasion of the destructibility doctrine through shifting and springing uses. Tracing the contingent use through to the rule's consolidation in the Duke of Norfolk's Case is essential for any deep-history property research.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Rapalje & Lawrence capture the central doctrinal resolution with precision: contingent uses "properly take effect as remainders and in imitation of contingent remainders." This framing reflects the judicial and scholarly consensus that had formed by the time of their writing — that whatever theoretical freedom from common law rules contingent uses once promised, the courts had largely domesticated them by applying remainder doctrine. The requirement they identify — that a vested estate of freehold must precede the future use when it operates as a remainder, and that the remainder must vest either during the supporting estate or at its close — tracks the standard three rules of contingent remainders directly.
What Rapalje & Lawrence do not address is the earlier, contested period when uses were argued to be free from destructibility. Coke and his contemporaries debated whether a contingent use could survive conditions that would have destroyed a contingent remainder at common law. The historical dictionary entry begins mid-resolution; researchers needing the disputed period must go to the treatise literature, particularly Fearne on Contingent Remainders, which addresses this arc in detail.
No significant divergence among historical sources on the end-state doctrine as stated. The divergence lies in how quickly and completely the remainder rules were applied to future uses, a question the dictionary entry does not open.
---
Jurisdictional Note
The Statute of Uses applies as received English law in many American states, but its scope and survival vary significantly. New York's 19th-century statutory reforms effectively replaced the Statute of Uses framework. In jurisdictions that retained the Statute, contingent uses remain a theoretical category, though live disputes are rare. Researchers should check whether the Statute of Uses was enacted, received, or abolished in the relevant jurisdiction before applying this doctrine.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
The Law Mind Property Law Encyclopedia: Zoning — Special Use Permits and Conditional Use Permits (background on conditional interests in property contexts, though addressing a distinct modern doctrine)
Note: No Law Mind encyclopedia entry addresses contingent uses or future interests directly. Researchers should consult the Property Law Encyclopedia for foundational property concepts adjacent to this term.
---