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 >>
Baillie v Nasmith and the Tenants of Letham. [1674] Mor 703 (15 January 1674)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1674/Mor0200703-040.html Cite as:
[1674] Mor 703
Subject_1 ARRESTMENT. Subject_2 What Subjects Arrestable.
Baillie v. Nasmith and the Tenants of Letham
Date: 15 January 1674 Case No. No 40.
Tenants were decreed to pay a sum to the heritor, to be employed in repairing a house liferented by a third party. Not arrestable, being destined for a certain purpose, in which a third party was concerned.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
William Baillie of Torwoodhead, having arrested in the hands of the Tenants of Letham, any sums due by them to the Lord Forrester, for payment of a sum due by Forrester to him, pursues now the tenants for making furthcoming. Compearance is made for young Posso, donatar to his father's liferent, who hath right to the rents of Letham, as husband to the Lady Letham, the Lord Forrester's mother, and for him and the tenants. It was alleged, That the only sum due by the tenants of Letham to the Lord Forrester, Was, by decreet of Council produced, whereby the tenants were decerned with the Lady Letham and her husband, to repair the house of Letham, liferented by the Lady, betwixt and Lammas thereafter; or otherwise, to pay to the Lord Forrester, as heritor thereof, 3200 merks, to be employed for reparation of the house; which sum being by the decreet, destined for that particular use of reparation, was not arrestable, for the Lord Forrester's debt, or applicable to any other use; especially seeing not only the Lord Forrester himself was interested, but the Lady liferenter, and her husband, who had the benefit of the house when repaired; so that the tenants thought that they were in security to pay the sum to Forrester, even after the arrestment, and had paid a great part of it.
The Lords found, That this sum being decerned and destined for the particular use of reparation, which did not only concern the Lord Forrester, but others, that it was not arrestable for Eorrester's debt.
