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 >> Kerr of Moriston, and other Freeholders of Berwickshire v Primrose [1747] Mor 8687 (10 November 1747) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1747/Mor218687-102.html |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Subject_1 MEMBER of PARLIAMENT.
Subject_2 DIVISION IV. Decisions common to qualifications upon the old extent and valuation.
Subject_3 SECT. I. Vassals in lands forfeited by the superior. - Fishings may be joined to lands to complete a qualification. - Proprietor pro indiviso. - Feu-duties payable out of church-lands. - Mortified lands sold. - To give a qualification there must be a feudal vassal in the lands. - Bodies corporate. - Minors. - Exchange of pieces of land. - Infeftment in virtue of a clause of union, and dispensation in a Crown charter. - Burgage lands sold by the burgh. - Where the superior is unentered. - Person divested by a trust-deed. - The claim must describe the title for enrolment. - Eldest sons of Peers. - Charter granted by a factor loco tutoris. - Roman Catholics. - Officers of the Revenue.
Date: Kerr of Moriston, and other Freeholders of Berwickshire
v.
Primrose
10 November 1747
Case No.No 102.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A person enrolled by the freeholders as heir apparent to the eldest of three heirs-portioners, was, on a complaint, ordered to be expunged; though it was argued, that the first adjudger is entitled to vote, so the eldest heir-portioner should have the right of the vote, which, though she cannot exercise herself, might accrue to her husband or her son.
*** This case is No 17. p. 8577.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting