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 >> Sharp of Houston v Glen. [1666] 2 Brn 138 (16 February 1666) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1666/Brn020138-0365.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JAMES DALRYMPLE OF STAIR.
Date: Sharp of Houston
v.
Glen
16 February 1666 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Glen pursues for mails and duties of some lands. Houstoun compears, and alleges, That he has right to these lands, by an apprising expired. It was answered, His apprising was null; because it proceeded on four bonds, the term of payment of one whereof was not come the time of the apprising; and so, not being due, the apprising was void quoad totum. It was answered, The sum was due, albeit the day was not come; and so being but plus petitum tempore, he was willing to admit the apprising to be longer time by the double, redeemable after the legal were expired, than all the time he apprised before the hand. The Lords found the apprising void as to that sum. Whereupon occurred to them to consider whether the apprising should fall in totum, or stand for the other three bonds; and, if it stood for these, whether a proportionable part of the lands apprised, effeiring to the bond, whereof the term was not come, should be found free, or if the rest should affect the whole lands, as if for these only the apprising had been led. Wherein the Lords were of different opinions, and recommended to the reporter to agree the parties.
Vol. I, Page 358.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
