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!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
Mr John Baine v Balfour. [1668] Mor 6693 (17 December 1668)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1668/Mor1606693-120.html Cite as:
[1668] Mor 6693
In what cases Extracts sustained to satisfy production. - When condescendence of the writs called for is sufficient. - Transumpts.
Mr John Baine v. Balfour
Date: 17 December 1668 Case No. No 120.
Extracts out of the registers of inferior courts cannot hinder certification in improbations.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an improbation, pursued by Mr John Baine, writer, against Mr Robert Balfour of Denmiln, wherein certification was granted; it was alleged, That it could not be extracted, as to several lands condescended on, for any writs prior to those produced, because they had produced a full progress from the Abbots, or Lord of Lindores, before the pursuer's right. This allegeance was sustained, notwithstanding it was answered, That, if that progress were reduced, the pursuer would be forced to intent a new improbation, and so would be frustrated of the benefit of this action, which was intented to secure them from all further trouble. 2do, It was alleged, That the certification could be extracted, as to such writs whereof they had produced extracts out of the register, either under the Clerk's hands of the Session, or the Clerk's of Stewartry of Falkland, or Sheriffdom of Fife, because of the confusion of the late troubles. This was repelled, as to such writs as were registered in private Court-books, but not as to those registered in the books of Session, for which they recommended to the Clerk Register to try, if the registers of those years, of which the extracts were produced, were lost with their warrants.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 448. Gosford, MS. No 68. p. 24.
