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!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> James Cuningham v James Stewart. [1629] 1 Brn 174 (9 December 1629) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1629/Brn010174-0398.html |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION reported by SIR ROBERT SPOTISWOODE OF PENTLAND.
Subject_2 Such of the following Decision as are of a Date prior to about the year 1620, must have been taken by Spotiswoode from some of the more early Reporters. The Cases which immediately follow have no Date affixed to them by Spotiswoode.
Date: James Cuningham
v.
James Stewart
9 December 1629 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Cuningham, assignee constituted to a bond, and decreet following thereupon, by umquhile David Clerk, sought this assignation to be transferred in himself activè, against George Borthwick, granter of the bond to his cedent: Compeared Mr James Stewart, as creditor to the pursuer's cedent; and, for instructing thereof, produces letters of horning, whereby the said David Clerk was denounced rebel at his instance: whereupon, being admitted for his interest, he alleged no transferring of the assignation foresaid, because it was made by the said defender, he being rebel the time of the making thereof, and yet remaining rebel for the same cause; and so, by the 145th Act Parliament 1592, a lawful
creditor could not be prejudged by such an assignation. Replied, That the bond was heritable, and consequently might be assigned, notwithstanding of the Act of Parliament foresaid and the cedent's being at the horn. The Lords repelled the exception in respect of the reply. Page 21.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting