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!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> James Weems v Jean Mackgill and William Gourlay, her Husband. [1629] 1 Brn 172 (20 March 1629)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1629/Brn010172-0391.html

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1629] 1 Brn 172      

Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION reported by SIR ROBERT SPOTISWOODE OF PENTLAND.
Subject_2 Such of the following Decision as are of a Date prior to about the year 1620, must have been taken by Spotiswoode from some of the more early Reporters. The Cases which immediately follow have no Date affixed to them by Spotiswoode.

James Weems
v.
Jean Mackgill and William Gourlay, her Husband

Date: 20 March 1629

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

By contract of marriage between William Gourlay of Kincraig and Jean Mackgill, Thomas Gourlay, father to William, obliges himself to infeft her in the Sunny-half Lands of Kincraig; and also to warrant and defend her, during her lifetime, from payment of any teinds of that part wherein she was to be infeft, except the tack-duty, he being himself tacksman of his whole teinds: And, in case her husband should decease before his father Thomas, she set a back-tack to Thomas during his life, of the same lands, for payment of five chalders victual and 300 merks, as a duty for both stock and teind; conform whereunto Thomas possessed all his time, for the space of fifteen years, for payment of that duty. The said Thomas, before his decease a year or two, makes James Weems assignee to his tack of the teinds; upon which the assignee served inhibition against Jean and her husband, the laird of Finmouth, and pursued a spuilyie. Alleged, That obligement in the contract of marriage, and her possession conform. Replied, It was only personal, and could not strike against a singular successor. Yet the Lords found the exception relevant, in respect that contracts of marriage are favourable; the true meaning whereof was to be looked into.

Page 204.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1629/Brn010172-0391.html