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 >>
Row v Bruce, (Monro.) [1703] Mor 11520 (23 December 1703)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1703/Mor2711520-194.html Cite as:
[1703] Mor 11520
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
An heiress, to secure a tailzie in favour of her two sisters, having, by a clause therein, obliged herself not to contract debt without the consent of two interdictors therein named, and thereafter marrying, and, with consent of her husband and the interdictors, making another bond of tailzie in the terms of the former, and only assuming her husband into the conjunct fee and liferent with herself, but without repeating the clause of interdiction, and thereafter contracting an heritable debt on the estate, the Lords, in a poinding of the ground at the instance of the creditor, wherein compearance was made for the presumptive heir of tailzie, and also for the interdictors, who had not consented to the bond, sustained the interdiction as valid; and found, that the second tailzie was not a novation of the first; and, therefore, reduced the debt, as being contracted after the interdiction.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 150. Fountainhall.
*** This case is No 40. p. 7162. voce Interdiction.
