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 >> Douglas of Douglas v Chalmers of Larbert. [1600] 5 Brn 587 (00 January 1600) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1600/Brn050587-0689.html Cite as: [1600] 5 Brn 587 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1600] 5 Brn 587
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION. reported by ALEXANDER TAIT, CLERK OF SESSION, one of the reporters for the faculty.
Subject_2 SASINE.
Douglas of Douglas
v.
Chalmers of Larbert
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the case of Douglas of Douglas and Robert Chalmers of Larbert, the instrument of sasine set forth John Wilson's appearing as attorney for Robert Chalmers and John Crawfurd the liferenter and fiar, having in his hands the charter in favours of Mr Chalmers in liferent, and John Crawfurd in fee. These writings being delivered to the bailie, the instrument bore that he gave sasine to Mr Crawfurd, forgetting to mention Mr Chalmers ; whereupon Wilson, as procurator for Mr Chalmers and Mr Crawfurd, for their respective rights of fee and liferent, took instruments. The objection was, that no sasine had been given to Mr Chalmers. And, at first, the Lords sustained the objection;
but, on a reclaiming petition, being sensible that the thing was actually done, and that the defect consisted merely in a blunder and inaccuracy of the writer, they repelled the objection, and sustained the sasine. In all the above cases the Lords proceeded upon this principle, That, where it appeared, ex facie of the instrument, that the thing was done, and that sasine was in reality given, blunders or mistakes, in extending the instrument, ought not to annul the sasine. And accordingly, in many cases, sasines labouring under defects have been sustained both by the Court of Session and House of Peers, which, at a more early period of our law, especially before the introducing the register of sasines, would have been sustained.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting