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 £5, 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 >> Pollock v Craig. [1773] 5 Brn 621 (00 August 1773) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1773/Brn050621-0756.html Cite as: [1773] 5 Brn 621 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1773] 5 Brn 621
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION. reported by Alexander Tait, Clerk Of Session, One Of The Reporters For The Faculty.
Pollock
v.
Craig
1773 .August .Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Mr Pollock of Airtherly agreed to grant a tack of his lands of Wraes to Craig for nineteen years. The tack was duly extended by Pollock's writer, and signed by the tenant, and put into the hands of the master, where it remained for sixteen years, during which time the tenant possessed the farm, but the tack was never signed by the master. In 1769 Mr Pollock wrote a letter to the tenant, promising that what lime he should lay upon the farm he should have nine years' produce of it; or, if he should not bruik the farm so long, that it should be referred to two honest men, what he should have, for not getting said nine years' produce. And, in consequence of this letter, the tenant laid on lime, and, as he alleged, improved the farm.
In 1771, when there was yet three years to run of the original tack, the master brought a removing against the tenant before the Sheriff. The tenant founded his defence on the tack, with possession following, and left in the heritor's hand, though not signed by him. The Sheriff however decerned in the removing; but, in an advocation, the Lord Monboddo, 1771, found the tenant, in consequence of the possession following on the tack, and other acts of homologation, entitled to continue his possession during the whole nineteen years of the tack; and gave expenses. In this judgment parties acquiesced.
Afterwards, in 1773, the master brought a new removing. The tenant founded on the missive about the lime. The Sheriff decerned in the removing, “reserving action to the tenant, as accords, for what money the pursuer ought to pay him, for not getting payment of the lime he may have laid on the lands libelled.”
The tenant presented a bill of advocation, which Lord Monboddo refused. The tenant reclaimed to the Lords, pleading for the nine years' produce of the lime, at least to keep possession till in this process his claim was liquidated and the money paid. But (as I think,) the Lords adhered.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
