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 >> Reid of Erdelton v Hamilton of Beill; [1633] 1 Brn 342 (19 March 1633) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1633/Brn010342-0910.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR GEORGE AUCHINLECK OF BALMANNO.
Reid of Erdelton
v.
Hamilton of Beill;
and
Robertson [or Lauriston]
v.
Donypace
1633 .March 19 .1633 .March 21 .Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Albeit an irritant clause be committed, whereby a party is obliged to relieve his cautioner of certain sums, and, for his relief, infefts him in his lands, with a condition, that in case he relieve him not, the reversion shall expire;—the Lords sometimes grant a term to the party, to purge the irritant clause; and, in case he purge it not, that the person who sought the declarator should pay the debts for the which he was infeft.
Sometimes a term is not granted, by reason of an Act of Sederunt, wherein it is declared, that the Lords will decern anent irritant clauses, according to the precise words of the condition.
Page 112.
In the declarator obtained by Robertson [or Lauriston] against Donypace, no term to purge was sought.
Page 112.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
