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 >>
Cleland and Geddes v Geddes. [1678] Mor 449 (8 February 1678)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1678/Mor0100449-083.html Cite as:
[1678] Mor 449
Subject_1 ALIMENT. Subject_2 ALIMENT due ex debito naturali.
Cleland and Geddes v. Geddes
Date: 8 February 1678 Case No. No 83.
Rules for the modification of the aliment, due ex jure naturæ.
Endurance of aliment.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A pursuit at a mother's instance against Kirkurd, for her daughter's aliment, and for making her own jointure six chalders yearly. Alleged to the first, He is content of a modification with respect to his debts: To the second, She possesses six chalders of Linlithgow measure already.——Replied, The lands lying in Twee-dale, she must have two pecks of each boll more conform to that measure, and the act 115th Ja. 6th, anno 1587, reducing all to the Linlithgow measure, contains an exception in favours of the masters of the ground, to whom their tenants are ordained to pay according to their old measure; and this being anent a ground duty, it falls under that exception.——The Lords found the foresaid clause behoved to be understood conform to the exception in the act of Parliament; and since the child had 10,000 merks provision, they modified 200 merks, being the third part of her annualrent, for her aliment, till she were seven years old; and half of her annualrent, viz. 300 merks, from that to ten; and two parts of her annualrent, viz. 400 from that till fifteen years of age, which was the term of payment of her provision. This is the common rule of modification in all cases where respect is had always to the child's provision; and the Lords regarded not that she was heir of line.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 33. Fountainhall, MS.
*** The endurance of aliment depends entirely on circumstances.—Where the family was not of high rank or of opulent estate, the aliment of daughters has been found to be due till majority or marriage, whichsoever event should happen first. But where the heir enjoys a considerable estate, and represents a family of dignity, as the daughters could not be supposed to earn their subsistence, at service, or in trade, their claim of aliment would continue even after majority, till marriage. See Bissets against Bissets, No 48. supra.
