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 >> Craw v Craw. [1680] Mor 13829 (25 February 1680) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1680/Mor3213829-068.html Cite as: [1680] Mor 13829 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1680] Mor 13829
Subject_1 REMOVING.
Subject_2 SECT. III. Warning, in what Cases necessary. - How to be executed.
Date: Craw
v.
Craw
25 February 1680
Case No.No 68.
Found in conformity with Moodie against Tenants, No 54. p. 13820.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
It was stated as a query among the Lords, if the execution of a warning to remove was null, because it did not bear a copy to be left on the ground of the lands, as the 39th act of Parliament 1555 requires, and conform whereto the constant practice of the kingdom (which is the best interpreter of laws) uses to affix a copy on a forked stick thrust in the ground. It was reasoned, That where tenants are personally warned, as here, there needed not a copy to be left, because the act runs alternative, either personally, or at their dwelling places, and at the ground of the lands; which two last make but one member, and are only to be used in case they be not personally warned; which first alternative being performed, there was no need to perform the other. It was answered, The leaving a copy on the ground was useful, for thereby the subtenants (who needs not be warned) are acquainted to remove with their masters. The Lords found the warning null.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting