BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it
will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free
access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
Lidderdale of St Mary's Isle v - . [1627] Mor 4247 (22 June 1627)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1627/Mor1004247-039.html Cite as:
[1627] Mor 4247
In questions between parents and children, who understood to be fiar.
Subject_3 SECT. I.
Right taken conjunctly to parent and child.
Lidderdale of St Mary's Isle v. -
Date: 22 June 1627 Case No. No 39.
A tack of teinds was set to a father and his son, and longest liver of them and their heirs. They were found to be conjunct tacksmen, and that the profits divided betwixt them during their joint lives, and after the death of the one, that the whole belonged to the surviver.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action of spuilzie at the instance of L. Isle against some defenders, a tack being set of the teinds therein contained, to the pursuer's father, and to the pursuer his son, and to the longest liver of them two, and their heirs; the Lords found, That the tack being of the tenor foresaid, the father and the son were conjunct and equal tacksmen, and that the benefit of the teinds therein contained should divide equally betwixt them, so long as they lived together; and after the decease of any of them the whole right thereof pertained to the surviver, being set to the father, and to the son, and to the longest liver of them, two, and their heirs, as said is; and therefore, because this pursuit was moved at the son's instance, for certain years owing before the decease of the father, which the son acclaimed, as appertaining to him; the Lords found, That he had only right to the half of the saids teinds of the years wherein his father lived; and that his father had right to the other half, and consequently, that the same pertained to his executors; and found that the father, all the years wherein he survived, had not right by virtue of the foresaid tack, to the said whole teinds, but to the half allenarly, he being conjunct tacksman, in respect of the tenor of the tack, and that after the decease of the father, the benefit of the whole tack pertained to the son pursuer.
Act. Lawtie.Alt. ——.Clerk, Gibson.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 300. Durie, p. 298.
