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 >>
Morison, Lord Prestongrange, v Heirs of the Earl of Lothian. [1735] Mor 13402 (22 July 1626)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1735/Mor3113402-007.html
Supposing the intention of benefiting, in what cases Recompence due.
Morison, Lord Prestongrange, v. Heirs of the Earl of Lothian
Date: 22 July 1626 Case No. No 7.
The Lords sustained action at the instance of a wadsetter for declaring that the reparation of a harbour in the wadset lands to be made by him, was profitable to the reverser.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
This day, there was an action moved at the instance of Mr Alexander Morison, one of the Lords of Session, against the apparent Heirs of the Earl of Lothian, by the which he, as having the wadset of the lands of Prestongrange and Aitchison's Haven, granted to him by the umquhile Earl of Lothian, desired that it might be found, that it was necessary and profitable to the Heirs of Lothian, to have the harbour of Aitchison's Haven beeted and re-edified again by him, which was cast down, and demolished by a preceding tempest, and was made thereby so unuseful to barks, that none could have access or entry, nor safe being within the same, except the same were repaired; without which reparation, the people and in-dwellers of the lands of Prestongrange would leave the ground, they finding their chief conveniency to consist by the said harbour, which gave them occasion to export the commodities of the ground, and to receive by the intercourse of trade and sailors, and others passing out, and coming in, within the said harbour, benefit and profit, which made the in-dwellers more meet to labour the said land, and to pay the rent thereof to the master and heritor; and which would not so continue, if the harbour were not re-edified; and so the heritor would want his rent, for the in-dwellers would leave the land; and therefore he desired, that the Lords would find and declare, that it was profitable and necessary for the heritor, that the same should be re-edified by the pursuer, who had the wadset, and that the expenses which he should deburse thereon, should be refunded to him by the heritor, or any other who had right to redeem the same, before the lands should be redeemed from him, and that the sums debursed should accresee to the reversion. This action was sustained; and after commission given by the Lords to two of their number to consider the estate of the harbour, who made report again of the ruin of the same, the summons was found relevant; and after probation by Witnesses, decreet was given, and the action sustained, conform to the desire of the summons. But no party compeared here for the defender.
Clerk, Scol.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 317. Durie, p. 223.
