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 >>
Dr Andrew Heron of Bargaly, v Patrick Heron of Heron. [1774] Mor 7007 (2 July 1774)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1774/Mor1707007-063.html Cite as:
[1774] Mor 7007
Dr Andrew Heron of Bargaly, v. Patrick Heron of Heron
Date: 2 July 1774 Case No. No 63.
After appeal taken from judgments of this Court, and served hinc inde, it is competent to the pursuer to use an inhibition against the defender, as on a dependense.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
After much litigation between these parties respecting the estate of Bargaly, the Court ultimately fixed certain rules, according to which Patrick Heron was to account for the possession of the estate, which was held for some years by him and his predecessors; and a remit was made to an accomptant to examine and report a state of the accompts, who had accordingly stated the accompts in different views, by all of which he established balances, as due to the Doctor, at Whitsunday 1773, by Patrick Heron, who surrendered to him the possession of the estate at the said term.
Patrick Heron having taken an appeal to the House of Lords, and served the same, the Doctor entered a cross appeal, and he afterwards executed an inhibition against Mr Heron, to the full extent of the sum concluded for by his libel, and recorded the same in the general register.
Upon an application to the Court, on the part of Mr Heron, to recal this inhibition, the Court, by their first interlocutor, found, That, after an appeal taken in the cause by both parties, hinc inde, and served, there was no dependence in this Court, upon which inhibition could proceed; therefore recalled the inhibition complained of, &c. But, upon reviewing the case, the Court were of opinion, that this was still a depending process, and that the inhibition ought to stand good; and, therefore, gave the following judgment:
“Repel the objection to the inhibition, and find it valid and subsisting.”
Act. Dean of Faculty.Alt. Murray, Crosbie.Clerk, Tait.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 321. Fac. Col. No 119. p. 320.
