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 >>
Thomas Wilson v Foulis of Ratho. [1688] Mor 505 (23 February 1688)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1688/Mor0200505-043.html Cite as:
[1688] Mor 505
Subject_1 ANNUALRENT. Subject_2 ANNUALRENT due by TUTORS and CURATORS.
Thomas Wilson v. Foulis of Ratho
Date: 23 February 1688 Case No. No 43.
Although a tutor semel in tutela, must employ what is over the pupil's aliment upon annualrent, so as to leave it bearing annualrent; there is no similar obligation on a curator.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Lords, on Castlehill's report, renew the former interlocutor, (See 29th November 1683, No 39. supra,) and find the 100 merles modified must be deducted, not at the end of the account, but of every year.
1688. July 10. The case of Thomas Wilson's wife against Foulis of Ratho, mentioned 29th November 1683, and 23d February 1688, was decided.——The Lords found, What of the pupil's means was in the tutor's hands, he was bound yearly to employ it in annualrent; and though an accumulation of annualrents into a stock, so as to bear interest finita tutela, was required, yet there was no law nor custom obliging a curator to do the like finita curatela, though there seems to be the same parity; and that there was no ground to crave 100 merks yearly for the tutor's incident changes, they not being condescended on; and eo nomine, they added 50 merks of yearly augmentation to the aliment. (See Tutor and Pupil. See p. 354. of this Dictionary.)
