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!



BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Carmichael v Earl of Angus. [1589] Mor 14419 (00 March 1589)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1589/Mor3314419-001.html
Cite as: [1589] Mor 14419

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1589] Mor 14419      

Subject_1 SERVICE OF HEIRS.
Subject_2 SECT. I.

What Court competent to serve? - Service more burgi.

Carmichael
v.
Earl of Angus

1589. March.
Case No. No. 1.

Service of brieves of lands in a Regality, if the Lord thereof have any claim to the lands, should be by commission to the macers or others, notwithstanding the Lord of Regality's privilege.


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

The Laird Ballandie Carmichael obtained a commission to the four ordinary macers, to serve a brieve within the tolbooth of Edinburgh, which was raised by him to serve him nearest and lawful heir-male to umquhile Peter Carmichael, in the lands of Craigpetie, lying within the regality of Abernethy. The cause of the commission was alleged to be, that William, Earl of Angus, who was superior of the said Laird, pretended right and interest to the property of the said lands, and so albeit the lands lay within the regality of Abernethy, and that the service of brieves appertained directly to come forth of the Chancery of the regality; and therefore, because the Lord of the regality had interest to the property of the lands, and would be both judge and party, the commission was granted in manner foresaid. The Earl of Angus having meaned him by a supplication, that albeit he claimed interest to the property of the lands, yet he ought not to have been prejudged in his privilege of regality, but that the brieve ought to have been direct forth of the Chancery, and he to have given judges unsuspected to have sitten and and cognosced thereintill; the Lords found, that in so far as he claimed interest to the property of the lands, he nor his deputes could not be judges in the service of the brieves; and therefore ordained the commission to stand.

Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 370. Colvil, MS. p. 450.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1589/Mor3314419-001.html