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 >> Andrew Plummer v His Tutors and Nearest Relations by the Father's Side. [1757] Mor 16358 (8 March 1757)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1757/Mor3716358-287.html
Cite as: [1757] Mor 16358

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


[1757] Mor 16358      

Subject_1 TUTOR - CURATOR - PUPIL.

Andrew Plummer
v.
His Tutors and Nearest Relations by the Father's Side

Date: 8 March 1757
Case No. No. 287.

Tutors authorised to sell an heritable subject for the utility of the pupil, though not necessary on account of debts.


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

Four physicians in Edinburgh had originally joined in erecting an elaboratory, for preparing and selling chemical preparations, and a theatre for the accommodations of students attending their lectures upon chemistry. All their shares came at length into the person of one of the four, Dr. Plummer; who continued the project alone, and died in very good circumstances.

The Magistrates of Edinburgh, desirous that the project should continue in the person of a physician, offered to the tutors of the Doctor's son an unexceptionable price for the elaboratory.

It was plain, that the work could not be continued in the person of the infant; that the buildings of the elaboratory could not profitably be turned to any other use; and that the bargain was highly beneficial for the infant; for which reason, he and his tutors applied, by summary petition, to the Court, to be authorised to make the sale; on this ground, That the egestas of a pupil was not the only ground for the interposition of the Court to authorise a sale, but that an utility, founded on a necessity like the present, was likewise a ground for it; for which the doctrine of the civil law was quoted, contained in Voet, Tit. De rebus eorum qui sub tutelæ, &c. § 8.

The Lords thought they could not authorise the sale in this summary form, but that an action should be raised for that purpose; which accordingly was done, by the pupil and tutors, against his nearest relations: And then

“The Lords found, That it was for the utility of the pupil to sell the elaboratory; and therefore authorised the tutors to sell it.”

Act. J. Dalrymple, And. Pringle. Fac. Coll. No. 21. p. 36.

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/1757/Mor3716358-287.html