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 >> Lord Lovat v Lord Forbes. [1742] 1 Elchies 339 (2 December 1742) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1742/Elchies010339-024.html Cite as: [1742] 1 Elchies 339 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1742] 1 Elchies 339
Subject_1 PRESCRIPTION.
Lord Lovat
v.
Lord Forbes
1742 ,Dec. 2 .
Case No.No. 24.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Find that Lord Forbes may claim the benefit of the English statute of limitations; but remit to the Ordinary to hear parties, whether he is in the case of the exception from that statute. This last I moved because of the dispute in our roll not yet decided betwixt Middleton and Colonel Cathcart.
*** The case of Middleton is thus mentioned, 9th December 1742: The first question is, Whether the law of England or of Scotland must be the rule of judging in the question of prescription of this transaction, which passed in London in 1720?—and we agreed to the judgment given 3d instant, betwixt Lord Lovat and Forbes, that the English law was the rule; but what the construction of that law was, we all doubted; particularly first, Whether being in Scotland is the same as being beyond seas? 2dly, Whether the words “at the time of any such cause of action given or accrued,” means when it first accrued, or any time within the six years? And as to both points, allowed either party to bring what evidence they can of what is the law of England.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
