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 >>
George Hamilton, and Hamilton of Grange, his Father and Administrator v Captain George Boswell. [1715] Mor 13803 (10 February 1715)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1715/Mor3213803-036.html Cite as:
[1715] Mor 13803
George Hamilton, and Hamilton of Grange, his Father and Administrator v. Captain George Boswell
Date: 10 February 1715 Case No. No 36.
A precept of sasine by a father, as administrator in law for his son, a sufficient title.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action of removing, at the instance of these pursuers against Captain Boswell, it was, among other points, alleged for the defender, That the pursuer's title seemed defective, he being only infeft on a precept of sasine granted by the father, as administrator of law for him; which is the same thing as if the pursuer, being major, had granted a precept for infefting himself, which could never be sustained.
Answered for the pursuers, That our custom has directed the method of a superior's establishing the right of property in his own person, upon that superveniency, viz. either by obtaining precepts from the Chancery, if the King be the superior's immediate superior, or by the superior's granting a precept for infefting himself in the property, which was done here. And though thus it falls out that the giver and receiver of the infeftment is the same person, yet that is no matter; for one man often sustinet duplicem personam; and in different respects, and different rights, the same person may both give and receive. And this method of taking infeftment was solemnly found to be proper, in the case of the Daughters of Mr James Morton No 34. p. 6917. 26th November 1608.
The Lords repelled the nullity, and sustained the summons and warning ad hunc effectum, to make the defender liable to remove from the lands at Whit-sunday next, but not for violent profits.
Act. Dalsorf.Alt. Troup.Clerk, Dalrymple.
Bruce, v. 1. No. 65. p. 79.
