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 Leggat v Ann and Rachel Denoons. [1736] Mor 3099 (17 February 1736)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1736/Mor0803099-010.html Cite as:
[1736] Mor 3099
Judge acting in feriate time; or extra territorium.
John Leggat v. Ann and Rachel Denoons
Date: 17 February 1736 Case No. No 10.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the question betwixt these parties, the Lords found a decreet of furthcoming, obtained before the Bailies of Edinburgh, sitting in Edinburgh, against one of the inhabitants of the Canongate, not subject to their jurisdiction, null; and repelled the answer, That, by constant and immemorial usage, the inhabitants of the Canongate were convened before the Bailies of Edinburgh.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 202. C. Home, No 15. p. 36.*** Lord Kames reports the same case:
A decreet recovered before the Magistrates of Edinburgh against an inhabitant of the Canongate, held as confest upon a citation pro confesso, was, after his decease, found intrinsically null, the defender not having been subject to the jurisdiction; and one cannot be considered as contumacious in not answering to a citation before an incompetent judge; extra territorium jus dicenti impune non paretur; and the Lords did not regard the communis error, and constant consuetude of the Magistrates of Edinburgh, exercising a jurisdiction over the inhabitants of the Canongate, which might be sufficient to support diligence upon a debt habilely constituted, which is favourable, but can never be sufficient to found a debt, where there is no other document save the decreet itself.
