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!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Walter Ruddiman v The Merchant Maiden Hospital of Edinburgh. [1746] Mor 11155 (25 June 1746)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1746/Mor2611155-355.html
Cite as: [1746] Mor 11155

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1746] Mor 11155      

Subject_1 PRESCRIPTION.
Subject_2 DIVISION XII.

Who Privileged against Prescription?

Walter Ruddiman
v.
The Merchant Maiden Hospital of Edinburgh

Date: 25 June 1746
Case No. No 355.

A right being assigned to a minor, his minority is to be deducted from the prescription, though the assignation has not been intimated.


Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

Walter Ruddiman printer in Edinburgh, assignee by progress to a bond originally granted by Thomas Young son to Robert Young merchant there, pursued the Merchant Maiden Hospital of Edinburgh as being liable in the debt, by having accepted a gratuitous disposition from one of the representatives of Thomas Young.

The defence was prescription; and the reply, the minority of Thomas Smith, one of the intermediate authors to the pursuer.

Objected, That Thomas Smith having right by assignation, his minority could not be deducted, because the assignation not being intimated, the right was never vested in him, but remained in the cedent till the prescription was run.

Answered, That all rights competent to minors were saved to them by the statute; and it was only in competition with arresters, or other assignations intimated, that an unintimated assignation was defective.

“The Lords found, that there was sufficient presumptive evidence of the minority of Thomas Smith; and repelled the objection, that the assignation was not intimated.”

Reporter, Justice-Clerk. Act. A. Macdouall. Alt. C. Binning. Clerk, Gibson. Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 111. D. Falconer, v. 1. No 122. p. 150.

*** See further in this cause 30th July 1746, voce Presumption.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1746/Mor2611155-355.html