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 >> L.Hunthill v Rutherford. [1623] Mor 13379 (25 March 1623) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1623/Mor3113379-005.html Cite as: [1623] Mor 13379 |
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1623] Mor 13379
Subject_1 RECOGNITION.
Date: LHunthill
v.
Rutherford
25 March 1623
Case No.No 5.
Declarator of recognition.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action betwixt L. Hunthill and Rutherford, an infeftment being given of lands fallen by recognition, and thereupon decreet of removing obtained against the tenants; thereafter, upon resignation by him who acquired the right of recognition, another being infeft in these lands, and pursuing action of succeeding in the vice, against one who had entered to the possession of him, against whom the said decreet of removing was obtained before, as said is, at the author's instance; who compearing, and alleging the pursuer's right and sasine of the lands, to be no sufficient right and title, which could give him the right to the lands, or to produce this action, because it depended upon the right of recognition, acquired by his author, which was never declared, and no declarator of recognition being obtained upon the said first infeftment, the same, and all other subaltern rights depending thereupon, was not sufficient; this
allegeance was repelled, in respect of the decreet of removing obtained, as said is, by the pursuer's author, and of the pursuer's right proceeding upon resignation of his author, concerning the validity whereof, the pursuer could not, in this judgment of succeeding in the vice, be compelled to dispute. Alt. Belshes.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting