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 >> The Apparent Heirs of Lesly v Jaffray. [1671] 1 Brn 632 (21 June 1671) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1671/Brn010632-1570.html |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR PETER WEDDERBURN, LORD GOSFORD.
Date: The Apparent Heirs of Lesly
v.
Jaffray
21 June 1671 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Jaffray having comprised Lesly's estate, and the legal being expired, there was a pursuit raised, at the instance of his three daughters, apparent heirs, for count and reckoning, against the comprisers, ad deliberandum, only that they might know if they might safely enter heirs to their father:—It was alleged, That apparent heirs could only pursue exhibition of writs ad deliberandum; but no other action, which might put comprisers, and others having right, to trouble and expenses, of counts and reckonings; who might sustain great prejudice thereby; and yet, if they were not satisfied by their intromissions, the apparent heirs were not liable to them. It was replied, That the case of apparent heirs was most favourable; and, having annum deliberandi allowed to them by the law, they might take all lawful ways to know the condition of the estate of the defunct, as was found by two practiques, one in anno 1637, betwixt the apparent heirs of Home of Eccles against Home of Blackater; and another by an interlocutor in a process depending betwixt the Earl of Traquair and the Laird of Kirkhill.
The Lords did sustain the defence, notwithstanding of the reply, and found, That no action was competent to apparent heirs, ad deliberandum, but for exhibition of writs; and having considered the practiques, they found, that the last was upon consent, and did not quadrate; and for the first, that it was sustained against the factor and trustee of the apparent heir's father, which made the case something different; but yet declared, that they would not sustain the like in time coming.
Page 173.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
