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 >>
Armour v Boick. [1685] Mor 11091 (00 February 1685)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1685/Mor2611091-290.html Cite as:
[1685] Mor 11091
Triennial Prescription of Accounts, Act 1579. c. 83.
Armour v. Boick
1685.
February. Case No. No 290.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Foulis having paid the freight, expense, and charges of some goods that came from the plantations to England, consigned to him for the use of some Glasgow merchants; and having shipped these goods in a Scots bottom for Scotland, with bills of loading to the merchants, and a general accompt of charges, which was paid by some of the merchants, who recurred against the rest by an action for paying in their proportions;
Alleged for the defender; That the said accompt was unnecessarily paid to Foulis, seeing it was prescribed quoad modum probandi, by the elapsing of three years between the furnishing and the payment.
Answered; The goods for which the freight and charges were paid, being the return of an outward cargo furnished by Mr Foulis, a factor, in obedience to the joint commission granted to him by the defender and pursuers: 2do, The accompt was of money expended by Mr Foulis as a factor, and not of goods furnished by him as a merchant, which only falls under the act of Parliament.
The Lords sustained the answer; and found, That, by the law of burghs, factors advances was to bear annualrent from the time of their furnishing the money, though no annualrent was pactioned.
