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 >> Mr James Ord v Duffs. [1630] Mor 11083 (15 February 1630)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1630/Mor2611083-279.html
Cite as: [1630] Mor 11083

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


[1630] Mor 11083      

Subject_1 PRESCRIPTION.
Subject_2 DIVISION IX.

Triennial Prescription.
Subject_3 SECT. IV.

Triennial Prescription of Accounts, Act 1579. c. 83.

Mr James Ord
v.
Duffs

Date: 15 February 1630
Case No. No 279.

The triennial prescription takes place with respect to goods bought at different times by one merchant from another, to be sold again, as well as where brought by private parties for their own use.


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

Mr James Ord having pursued Duffs, as heirs and executors to umquhile Alexander Duffs, for payment of the prices of certain glasses, viz. drinking glasses and window glasses which were received by the said umquhile Alexander at sundry times pertaining to Mr James, and were sent by him to England with his servant in a ship, freighted by the said Alexander to that effect, in which ship the said Alexander made sail, and who, after selling of the said glasses in Hull in England, intromitted with the whole prices thereof, and never made him payment thereof. The Lords found, That this action (which was not intented within three years after the time of the libelled intromitting with the glasses and prices thereof) came under the act of Parliament 1579 anent prescription in certain cases of debt, not being pursued debito tempore, and therefore that the same could not be proved but by writ or oath of party, and that it was not probable by witnesses, no more against the executor than against the defunct.

Act. Nicolson & Oliphant. Alt. Cunningham. Clerk, Hay. Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 119. Durie, p. 492.

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/1630/Mor2611083-279.html