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 >>
James Swan v James Swan. [1786] Mor 9418 (30 June 1786)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1786/Mor2209418-027.html Cite as:
[1786] Mor 9418
Whether a Party may be required to depone super facto alitno? - Whether Oath of Party, must be special?
James Swan v. James Swan
Date: 30 June 1786 Case No. No 27.
Oath of party, respecting the onerosity of a bill must be special.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
James Swan having made a reference to the oath of Samuel Swan, with respect to the onerosity of an indorsation of a bill, the latter deponed in general, ‘That he paid value for the indorsation, and was an onerous indorsee.’ But being requested to mention particularly what the value was, he refused to give any more special answer.
During an action which depended on that point, between Samuel Swan and James Swan, Samuel died; and afterwards his heir, James Swan, having been made a party,
The Lord Ordinary sustained the oath as a sufficient proof of onerosity. But
The Court altered that judgment, and found, that Samuel Swan was not entitled to the privileges of an onerous indorsee.
Lord Ordinary, Stonefield.Clerk, Menzies.For the Heir of S. Swan, Currie.Alt. Honyman.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 22. Fac. Col. No 286. p. 441.
