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 >> William Turner, Notary in Birse, v Alexander Ross of Tillisnaught. [1707] 5 Brn 34 (5 July 1707) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1707/Brn050041-0034.html Cite as: [1707] 5 Brn 34 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1707] 5 Brn 34
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by WILLIAM FORBES, ADVOCATE.
Date: William Turner, Notary in Birse,
v.
Alexander Ross of Tillisnaught
5 July 1707 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Alexander Ross of Tillisnaught having pursued reduction of one Middle-ton's testament against William Turner; and the cause coming to be advised in præsentia upon the 19th January, 1695; and the votes happening to be equal, the Lord Rankeillor, then President, superseded to give his casting vote till he should attempt an accommodation; and that proving abortive, he reported the same to the bench, the 9th February, 1695, and in presence signed the interlocutor of the former date. Thereafter his Lordship having given in a representation upon the 26th of the said month of February, when another President sat in the chair, bearing that the decreet had been put in the minute-book of the date when it was signed, and not when it was voted: The Lords allowed the same to be put up of new again of that present day's date, and it was extracted accordingly. William Turner raised reduction of this decreet upon this ground of nullity, that the interlocutor which is the warrant thereof was not signed in presence immediately after voting, in the terms of the Act 18th Sess. 4th Parl. W. M. and the Lord Rankeillor could not, three weeks after, when he was not President, have his decisive vote, without the question had been put to the whole Lords, and voted de novo.
The Lords repelled the reason of reduction.
Page 177.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
