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 >>
Bailie Sinclair v Lord Sinclair. [1686] Mor 14696 (00 January 1686)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1686/Mor3314696-091.html Cite as:
[1686] Mor 14696
Subject_1 SOLIDUM ET PRO RATA. Subject_2 SECT. XV.
Tutors and Curators.
Bailie Sinclair v. Lord Sinclair
1686.
January. Case No. No. 91.
Found in conformity with the above.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Bailie George Sinclair having pursued the Lord Sinclair, his nephew, for payment of a bond of 4500 merks, granted by Hermiston, the defender's father, to the pursuer, as his provision conform to their father's destination,
Alleged for the defender: That the pursuer, having been one of his curators, præsumitur intus habere ante redditas rationes.
Answered for the pursuer: It is notoriously known, that he never intromitted, and that Sir James Cockburn, the co-curator, was sole intromitter; and the pursuer offered to find caution to refund, if he were found liable, in the event of count and reckoning.
Replied: All curators are liable in solidum, whether they intromit or not.
The Lords sustained the defender's reply.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 383. Harcarse, (Tutors and Curators) NO. 985.
*** A similar decision was pronounced, 9th February, 1684, Lockhart against Elies, No. 41. p. 504. voce Annual-rent.
