Definition
A shifting clause is a provision in a settlement or conveyance that substitutes an alternative mode of inheritance or devolution for the one primarily established. When a triggering condition is met, the estate or interest shifts away from the person or line originally designated and passes instead to another, bypassing ordinary succession rules. The mechanism belongs to the law of future interests and operates as a type of executory limitation — the shift occurs by operation of the clause itself, not through forfeiture or separate conveyance.
Two distinct (though related) uses appear in the historical sources:
1. Shifting clause in a family settlement: A provision within a strict settlement redirecting the course of devolution if specified circumstances arise. The most familiar example is the name-and-arms clause, by which a beneficiary forfeits the settled estate if he fails to assume the surname and arms of the settling family. A less common variant destines the settled estate as the foundation for a second branch of the family if the elder branch acquires independent wealth elsewhere.
2. Shifting use: A use that takes effect in derogation of a prior estate. At common law, a use that divested a preceding interest could not be created at law, but the Statute of Uses (1536) enabled the limitation of shifting uses through a deed. Bouvier gives the standard illustration: a feoffment to the use of W and his heirs, with a proviso that if a named condition occurs, the use shifts to another party. The earlier interest is cut short; the later interest springs into possession by force of the equitable limitation now executed at law.
The two senses share a common mechanism — substitution of one devolution for another upon a contingency — but the settlement clause operates within the framework of strict family settlements, while the shifting use is the underlying legal concept that gives those clauses their operative force.
---
Common Confusion
SHIFTING CLAUSE vs. SPRINGING USE: A shifting use cuts short an existing interest and transfers it to a third party. A springing use springs up in favor of the grantee out of the grantor's fee, without divesting a prior grantee's estate. Researchers encountering both terms in the same conveyance should note that they describe different mechanisms of divestiture, even though both are executory interests under modern analysis.
SHIFTING CLAUSE vs. DEFEASANCE CLAUSE: A defeasance clause terminates or voids an obligation or estate upon a condition (e.g., mortgage discharge). A shifting clause does not terminate the interest — it redirects it to another taker. The estate continues; only its direction changes.
---
Why It Matters in Research
The term appears almost exclusively in materials dealing with English strict settlements and the post-Statute of Uses property regime. Researchers working in American property sources from the colonial period through the mid-nineteenth century will encounter shifting clauses mainly in treatises importing English doctrine; the device was never as fully developed in American practice because strict family settlements were less central to American land tenure.
Corpus traps to watch:
— "Shifting clause" in older American sources may refer loosely to any clause that redirects property, not specifically to the settlement device. Context matters.
— The name-and-arms clause, the most cited example, appears in English sources far more often than American ones. American researchers finding it should treat it as a marker of English-influenced drafting or a scholarly treatise context, not domestic American practice.
— In late nineteenth and early twentieth century sources, "shifting" begins appearing in fee-shifting and burden-shifting contexts (litigation costs, evidentiary presumptions) entirely unrelated to property law. These are false cognates. The dictionary entry for SHIFTING CLAUSE does not govern those uses.
— Modern property law has largely absorbed shifting clauses into the category of executory interests (shifting executory interests, specifically), which are subject to the Rule Against Perpetuities. Researchers reading older materials that treat shifting clauses as exempt from perpetuity concerns should note that this reflects pre-modern doctrine, not current law.
The connection to executory interests and the Statute of Uses is the essential thread. Any research into shifting clauses will quickly require engagement with future interests doctrine generally.
---
Historical Dictionary Support
Black's, Rapalje & Lawrence, and Bouvier are in close agreement on the core definition: a shifting clause substitutes an alternative devolution for the one primarily prescribed. All three treat the name-and-arms clause as the paradigm example. Rapalje & Lawrence cite Davies on conveyancing (3 Dav. Conv.) as authority, signaling the English doctrinal lineage.
Bouvier adds the most useful doctrinal texture by separating the settlement clause from the shifting use as a concept, citing Gilbert on Uses and Washburn on Real Property. This separation is valuable because it connects the clause to the broader framework of executory interests rather than treating it as a freestanding drafting curiosity.
What the historical dictionaries omit: none of the three sources grapple with the Rule Against Perpetuities implications of shifting clauses, which became a significant doctrinal issue as perpetuities law developed. Researchers relying solely on these dictionary definitions will get the mechanics of the clause but will miss the limitations that modern (and even late nineteenth-century) law imposed on it.
---
Jurisdictional Note
Shifting clauses as a formal device are predominantly English in origin and application. American jurisdictions that abolished or modified strict settlements early (most did, by the mid-nineteenth century) largely rendered the classic shifting clause obsolete in practice, though the underlying concept survives in the law of executory interests. Researchers working in Louisiana, with its civil law heritage, will find different but analogous substitution mechanisms in fideicommissary substitutions.
---
Encyclopedia Cross-Reference
Property Law Encyclopedia — "Future Interests: Executory Interests (Springing and Shifting)": Essential companion entry. Provides the doctrinal framework — including Rule Against Perpetuities analysis — within which shifting clauses operate.
---