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!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Stevenson v Dobie. [1671] 1 Brn 633 (24 June 1671) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1671/Brn010633-1572.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR PETER WEDDERBURN, LORD GOSFORD.
Date: Stevenson
v.
Dobie
24 June 1671 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Stevenson, having comprised the lands whereof Dobie was tacksman, did pursue for maills and duties. It was alleged for Dobie, That he was infeft in an annualrent, and in possession before the compriser's infeftment or diligence; which being found relevant for proving his possession, in termino probatorio, at the advising of the cause; It was alleged for the compriser,—That the tack could not prove possession of the annualrent; because the first term of payment thereof was after the compriser's infeftment; and so it could not be drawn back, there being medium impedimentum. It was answered, That the annualrenter being tacksman, and in natural possession, could do no diligence against himself for obtaining a decreet of possession; and therefore, his possession, from the time that he was infeft, behoved to run, and make his annualrent clad with possession.
The Lords did repel the defence, and preferred the compriser; and found, that the annualrent could not be clad with possession until the first term of payment was past; but, if the annualrenter had obtained decreet of poinding the ground against the heritor, the term of payment being elapsed, the case would have been more difficult.
Page 176.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
