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 >>
William Crawford v Andrew Duncan. [1666] Mor 16927 (6 June 1666)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1666/Mor3816927-162.html Cite as:
[1666] Mor 16927
A bond wanting a date was referred to the oath of the alleged subscriber, with permission to him to add what quality he pleased.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
William Crawford, as assignee to a bond of 200 merks, granted by Andrew Duncan, pursues for payment. It was alleged, absolvitor, because the bond was null, having no date at all, et data est de substantialibus. It was answered, that the pursuer offered him to prove by the defender's oath, that it was his true subscription, which was sufficient; and the date is only substantial, when improbation is alleged, or any right that might take away the writ, if it were of such a date, as a prior assignation or general discharge.
The Lords found the reply relevant, with this provision, that the defender might adject what quality he thought fit, as these mentioned, or that it was done in minority, or not delivered, &c. but they found him not obliged to depone simpliciter, upon the verity of the subscription, and to prove such qualities; as they had done before, in a holograph writ, wanting date, the last session, in the process betwixt the Earl of Kinghorn and Sir James Murray.
