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 >>
Kintore v Sinclair. [1623] Mor 9425 (6 January 1623)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1623/Mor2309425-001.html Cite as:
[1623] Mor 9425
A promise found to be obligatory, though but nudum pactum, without a preceding cause.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The relict of one Kintore libelled, that by a verbal submission betwixt one Sinclair in Orkney, and her umquhile husband, decreet-arbitral was pronounced and written, decerning Sinclair to pay to her husband L. 100; and that Sinclair, son to the said Sinclair, against whom that decreet was given, had diverse times promised to her that sum; and albeit Sinclair, defender, alleged, That she neither being executrix to her husband, nor he heir nor executor to his father, neither she could crave the sum, nor he heir nor executrix to his father; yet the Lords sustained the pursuit. I contradicted, because the promise was nudum pactum, having no preceding cause, and that promises of that kind are not obligatory; because, if a man had not only promised verbally to pay, but to give his obligation for payment, and had directed the bond to be written, might repent, much more this party might resile, since there was no necessary cause of the promise, neither the pursuer having right to the sum decerned, in case the decreet had had a warrant, nor the defender being a party that could be subject to the decreet; nevertheless the Lords persisted in their opinion, the pursuer finding caution to relieve the defender at the hands of the heir and executors of the defunct.
