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 >>
John Johnston v Callander of Dorator and Willison. [1697] 4 Brn 371 (17 June 1697)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1697/Brn040371-0767.html
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.
John Johnston v. Callander of Dorator and Willison
Date: 17 June 1697
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
I Also reported John Johnston, Keeper of the Parliament-house, against Callander of Dorator and Willison; where the question was,—If the titles of intromission founded on, though not sustained to defend against restitution, yet were sufficient to infer such a bona fides and probable ground as to assoilyie from repaying the annualrents from the date of the uplifting. The Lords had found Dorator not liable, neither for his neglecting exact diligence, nor to refund these annualrents, in respect of his bona fides. This being allowed a second hearing, it was contended, that the titles produced were all predoneous, and patched up by simulate collusion between Langlands, the tutor, and him; and, it being ignorantia juris, it can afford no excuse.
Answered,—The testament giving up the whole estate, both heritable and moveable, erroneously, this led them all into the same error of a promiscuous intromission; like the testament mentioned in l. 88. sect. 17. D. de Legat. II. 2do. Ignorantia juris, in things that are juris positivi et in apicibus juris, always excuses; as also where one versatur in damno vitando, as Dorator does here: and it is enough to introduce bona fides, that I possess animo dominantis, thinking the goods mine; and, though negotiorum gestores and pro-tutors be liable for accurate diligence, yet Dorator is not in their case.
