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 >> Sir William Forbes and Others v James Ramsay and Others. [1773] Hailes 510 (15 January 1773) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1773/Hailes010510-0273.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR DAVID DALRYMPLE, LORD HAILES.
Subject_2 SALE.
Date: Sir William Forbes and Others
v.
James Ramsay and Others
15 January 1773 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
[Supp. V. 583.]
Monboddo. I did not think that so much could have been said for the pursuers in this case. Yet I am of the opinion of the interlocutor. Drummond was under no obligation to apply the materials poinded for finishing the houses of the pursuers. He remained proprietor of the materials, and consequently his creditors might poind them. The pursuers might have charged Drummond on his contract, and then poinded the materials.
Auchinleck. Had the materials been lying in a carpenter's shop, there would have been no pretence for claiming them: there is as little here.
Kaimes. Had the materials been in actu proximo of being used, I should have had a doubt. Drummond would have been in pessima fide to sell the materials in controversy.
On the 15th January 1773, “the Lords found the poinding regular and effectual;” adhering to Lord Gardenston's interlocutor.
Act. Ilay Campbell. Alt. R. Cullen.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
