Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 SPUILZIE.
Subject_2 SECT. III.

To whom the Action is Competent.

Laird of Durie
v.
Stephen Duddingston

Date: 19 February 1549
Case No. No. 22.

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

If a tenant or possessor of any room set to him with steelbow goods being ejected or spuilzied of his possession or goods, the action of spuilzie concerning the possession and restitution thereof pertains to the said tenant's master, but the action of spuilzie concerning the steelbow goods pertains to the said tenant allenarly, because the same is his own by nature of the contract of steelbow, and was in his possession, and not in his master's.

Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 389. Balfour, p. 468. *** Sinclair reports this case:

In a cause of spuilzie intented by the Laird of Durie against Stephen Duddingston, the Lords decreeted Stephen to have spuilzied him of his possession of the lands of ——, because Stephen violently put A. who was tacksman and tenant to the said Laird, off the said lands; and that the Laird was in possession thereof by his said tenant, and spuilzied of his possession; because his tenant, who bruiked the lands in the Laird's name, was violently put from the lands, he ought to be restored to the said possession in the person of his tenant; but quia the goods and gear that were upon the ground foresaid, and spuilzied thereoff by the said Stephen were delivered by the said Laird of Dury to his said tenant and steelbow, and so were the tenant's own by nature of the contract of steelbow. The Lords decerned Stephen quit, because these goods pertained to the tenant, and were his own and in his possession, and not in his master's, and so actio spolii bonorum pertinet tenenti et nan domino,

Sinclair MS. p. 87.