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 >>
Lamb v Tweedie [1623] Mor 13424 (22 February 1623)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1623/Mor3113424-028.html Cite as:
[1623] Mor 13424
Parents liable for Furnishings to their Children. - In what cases the Children liable. - Qui in funus impendit.
Lamb v. Tweedie
Date: 22 February 1623 Case No. No 28.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action pursued by one Lamb against Tweedie, for payment of the prices of certain merchandises, furnished by the pursuer to him for his clothes, and habuilziments of his body, and others his necessaries, the particulars of which furnishing was referred to the defender's oath simpliciter, the Lords would not sustain this action, because the same was moved and intented for furnishing of clothes made to the defender, being then minor, et in familia paterna, his father, at the alleged time of the furnishing, and before, being in use to take off to the defender, and to provide him of such necessaries as were contained in the summons; so that the pursuer could not of the law have any competent action against the minor therefor, but ought to pursue his father for the same prout de jure, but ordained the use of furnishing alleged made by the father to be proved.
Clerk, Scot.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 320. Durie, p. 50.*** Haddington reports this case:
In an action pursued by Lamb officer, assignee to Lamb merchant, against Mr James Tweedie, son to ————, for a sum of money contained in Lamb's account book, for clothes and other furnishings made to the defender, the Lords admitted the defender's exception, that he being minor, in familia et potestate paterna, furnished of meat, cloathing, and necessaries by his father, according to his estate, could not validly bind himself for furnishing to a merchant, during his minority.
