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 >>
Douglas, Heron and Co. v The Bank of England, and Others. [1781] Mor 14131 (2 August 1781)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1781/Mor3214131-035.html Cite as:
[1781] Mor 14131
Different securities on the Estate or Subjects of an Individual Debtor, how they are to be Ranked. - Ranking for Penalties or Expenses.
Douglas, Heron and Co v. The Bank of England, and Others
Date: 2 August 1781 Case No. No 35.
Creditors cannot be ranked twice for their whole debts, upon the same subject, in consequence of different diligences. See No 39. p. 14139
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the ranking of the Creditors of Messrs William and Robert Alexanders, the company of bankers under the firm of Douglas Heron and Co. claimed to be preferred in virtue of an heritable bond, upon sundry parcels of the bankrupt's landed estate in Scotland. They likewise claimed to be ranked a second time for their whole debts, in virtue of an adjudication, affecting the subjects, covered by the heritable bond.
To this claim the Bank of England, and others, adjudging creditors, opposed the decision 12th July 1769, Ranking of the Creditors of Auchinbreck, No 34. p. 14130, by which it was found, “That the heritable creditors adjudgers, were entitled to be ranked upon the funds pari passu with the other adjudgers, only for what remained due of their accumulated sums, after deduction of what they should draw in virtue of their infeftments.”
The interlocutor of the Court in this case was precisely in terms of the above decision.
Lord Ordinary, Justice-Clerk.Act. Abercromby.Alt. Rae, Law, W. Miller.
Fol. Dic. v. 4. p. 243. Fac. Col. No 79. p. 135.
*** See Observations on this case in the Appendix.
