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 £5, 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 >> Burgh v Gray. [1625] 1 Brn 134 (13 July 1625) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1625/Brn010134-0283.html |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION reported by SIR ROBERT SPOTISWOODE OF PENTLAND.
Subject_2 Such of the following Decision as are of a Date prior to about the year 1620, must have been taken by Spotiswoode from some of the more early Reporters. The Cases which immediately follow have no Date affixed to them by Spotiswoode.
Date: Burgh
v.
Gray
13 July 1625 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action of registration between Burgh and Gray; this Gray being infeft in certain lands ex contractu matrimoniali, shortly after, within two months, his father deceaseth. He perceiving his father heavily burthened with debt, more than all his goods would satisfy, ceaseth to meddle by uplifting the duty, and being pursued in this action, offered to renounce the said infeftment, cum omni causa; which he alleged could not be denied him, rebus adhuc integris; and especially considering, that, at the time of receiving the infeftment, he was minor, and could not know his father's burdens, he neither being inhibited nor at the horn. Nevertheless, for all these allegeances, the Lords decerned registration; reserving to him his action de restitutione in integrum, prout de jure. For they thought that his sasine, (especially it being taken propriis manibus,) and confirmation of the superior, the Constable of Dundee, thereupon; was as good as if he had apprehended possession, by uplifting of the mails and duties; and that ignorance of his father's estate could be no more profitable to him than to an heir who had ignorantly and precipitately meddled with any heirship-goods, who afterwards had no place to resile or renounce.
Page 299
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting