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 >> The Laird of Ardros v Thomas Abercrombie and James Chrightoune. [1649] 1 Brn 427 (6 December 1649) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1649/Brn010427-1146.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by ROBERT MACGILL, LORD FOORD.
Date: The Laird of Ardros
v.
Thomas Abercrombie and James Chrightoune
6 December 1649 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Laird of Ardros prevailed against James Chrightoune for a debt aughting by Thomas Abercrombie of that ilk to his father, because, by the bond charged upon, the said James was obliged to relieve the said Thomas of that debt; notwithstanding that James opponed a renunciation of the lands, by payment of 12,000 or 13,000 merks. This bond of Thomas Abercrombie to Ardros his father, bearing the sum to be eiked to the reversion, because it was never registrate, and remaining so, personal, it was understood that the said James did refuse to pay it, the time of the renunciation granted. Whereupon, within 24 hours, Ardros his father caused arrest some of the price of the land: but deceasing, or otherwise hindered, while the said Thomas Abercrombie came out of Ireland. He then, being urged upon his own bond, did assign this bond of
warrandice and relief, whereupon the suspender is charged: notwithstanding it was alleged, in fortification of the reason, that John More received the said debt, being 1,000 merks, and that my Lord Innerpeffer, in the pursuit of declarator or some such process, had taken some dealing in the matter; and therefore the suspender urged that they might be examined saltem ex officio. Which the Lords refused. Page 80.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
