Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 TACK.
Subject_2 SECT. III.

Ish. - Indefinite Endurance, how limited?

Redpath of Angelraw
v.
White

Date: 22 November 1737
Case No. No. 62.

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

In a removing against a tenant, who had entered into possession, in virtue of a minute of tack, which bore no term of endurance, it was pleaded, That a tack wanting an ish, is void and null, Stair, Tit. Tack, § 27. Such a tack must be perpetual or nothing. It is a principle, that all obligations are, in their nature, perpetual; therefore, there can be no medium, but either that the tack is null or perpetual; for, supposing it once legally constituted, there is nothing to limit the endurance. Answered, Though other obligations be, in their nature, perpetual, this is inconsistent with the nature of a tack; and therefore it must be in arbitrio judicis to fix the time of endurance; and, as to this, there are clauses in the tack, which show it was intended to endure longer than one year, such as, that the tenant is tied to muck a certain quantity of ground yearly, to bring home to his master, every year, twenty loads of coals, &c. The Lords sustained the tack for two years. See Appendix

Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 420.