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!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
Creditors of York-Buildings Company v Fordyce. [1778] Mor 13374 (7 July 1778)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1778/Mor3113374-057.html Cite as:
[1778] Mor 13374
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In 1735, the Annuitants on the estates of the York-Buildings Company raised a process of ranking and sale of these estates. This action was depending in 1744, when the Duke of Norfolk and others, partners of the Company, applied by petition to the Court for a sequestration, setting forth, That the Company, as proprietors, were giving leases of their lands at an under rent. The Court remitted to an Ordinary to inquire into the facts; and, in the mean time, prohibited the Company to give any lease without the Court's authority. In the interval betwixt presenting the petition and this prohibition, the Company had prorogated a subsisting lease of Belhelvie, to David Fordyce, for 37 years after expiry of the current lease; and Fordyce and his assignees continued to possess on this lease from 1745 to 1776, when the greatest part of the annuities being expired, an act of Parliament was obtained by the postponed creditors for a total sale of the Company's estates. A sequestration ensued; and a factor being appointed, with powers to bring reductions of the leases, a process was brought for that purpose against the assignees of Fordyce. Urged for the pursuers, The Company had no power to grant the lease in question; they were insolvent; the annuitants drawing the rents; the lands adjudged; and a process of sale and petition for sequestration in Court. Answered, The Company had not been deprived of the administration, either by their own trust-deeds, or by the diligence of their creditors; and the granting leases was within their ordinary powers of administration.—The Lords sustained the reasons of reduction.
Affirmed in House of Lords.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 216. Fac. Col.*** This case is No 76. p. 8380. voce Litigious.
A similar judgment was, the same day, pronounced in the case of a lease granted by the York-Buildings Company to Dr Steuart Threipland, for 99 years. Creditors of York-Buildings Company contra Threipland.—Reversed in House of Lords.
