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 >> George Reid v Thomas Harper. [1663] Mor 2733 (19 June 1663) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1663/Mor0702733-065.html Cite as: [1663] Mor 2733 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1663] Mor 2733
Subject_1 COMPETENT.
Subject_2 SECT. XV. Bankruptcy, how Proponable.
Date: George Reid
v.
Thomas Harper
19 June 1663
Case No.No 65.
A right by infeftment, granted contrary to the act of Parliament 1621, cannot be challenged by exception, but by reduction.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
These parties competing in a double poinding, George Reid craved preference because he was assigned to the mails and duties by Thomas Mudie, heritor of the land.—Thomas Harper alleged, That he had arrested the duties upon a debt owing to him by William Mudie, father to the said Thomas, and any right Thomas had was fraudulent and null by exception, by the express words of the act of Parliament 1621, being betwixt father and son, without any onerous cause, and he ought not to be put to reduce in re minima, his debt being within L. 100.
The Lords found he behoved to reduce, conform to their constant custom in heritable rights.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting