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 £5, 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 >>
Antonia Birnie v Liferenters of Rossie. [1662] Mor 392 (13 February 1662)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1662/Mor0100392-014.html Cite as:
[1662] Mor 392
Subject_1 ALIMENT. Subject_2 Of the act 1491, cap. 25. anent alimenting of Heirs. Subject_3 Import of the Act:
It is ordained, that where any lands happen to fall in ward to the King, or any baron of the realm, spiritual or temporal, or lands given in conjunct fee or liferent, as well as to burgh as to land, that the sheriff of the shire or bailies shall take surety of the person or persons, that gets or has such wards, that they shall not waste or destroy their biggings, orchards, woods, stanks, parks, meadows, or dovecots, but that they hold them in such kind as they are in the time that they receive the same; they taking their reasonable sustentation, or using, in needful things, without destruction or wasting thereof. “And an reasonable living to be given to the sustentation of the air, after the quantitie of the heritage, gif the said air has na blanche ferme, nor feu ferme land, to susteine him on, alsweil of the ward lands, that fallis to our Soveraine Lordis hands, as onie uther barronne, spiritual or temporal.”
Scots Acts, v. 1. p. 158.
Antonia Birnie v. Liferenters of Rossie
Date: 13 February 1662 Case No. No 14.
The heir pursuing his mother, a liferenter, for aliment, must show that apprisings, which exhaust the residue of the estate, were led before the defunct's decease.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Antonia Birnie, as heir apparent, and having right to the fee of the estate of Rossie and Fordel, pursues her mother and grand-father, liferenters thereof, for a modification of aliment. The grand-father made no opposition.—It was alleged for the mother, That the whole inheritance was not liferented.—The pursuer answered, That what was not liferented, was affected with apprisings for the defunct's debts, led after his death.—The defender answered, non relevat, unless the apprisings had been before the defunct's death; but being against the apparent heir herself, she ought to sell land, and pay the debt, and live upon the remainder. The pursuer offered her to prove the apprisings and debts equivalent to the value of all the lands not liferented.
