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 >>
L. Freeland v Sheriff of Perth. [1630] Mor 4799 (28 July 1630)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1630/Mor1204799-017.html Cite as:
[1630] Mor 4799
Subject_1 FORUM COMPETENS. Subject_2 DIVISION. III.
Forum Delicti.
L Freeland v. Sheriff of Perth
Date: 28 July 1630 Case No. No 17.
A baton having unlawed his tenant for blood, the decree was found null, because the fact was not done upon the baron's ground, nor did the party hurt live within his jurisdiction, or make his complaint there.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
One of the L. Freeland's tenants being unlawed in his baron-court for blood, and being therefore lawfully convict, and having paid the unlaw; this tenant being thereafter convened for the same blood before the Sheriff, and it being drawn in dispute before the Lords, if that conviction, and payment conform thereto, done in his master's court, should liberate him, seeing the Sheriff alleged it ought not to free him, because albeit the baron might convict his own tenant, in his own court for blood, yet that right is only competent to the baron, where both the person committer of the blood, and the other party, whose blood is drawn, are both tenants to the baron; and so where they are both subject to the court, or else where, and when the fact is committed upon his own ground; but being done upon the ground, pertaining to another heritor, the baron had no power to cognosce thereupon. The Lords found, that seeing this fact was not done upon the baron's ground, and that both parties were not his tenants, neither did the party hurt complain to the master in the master's court, nor seek reparation there, quo casu the master might claim the process, if it had been so proceeded, albeit the committer was his tenant, yet that the Sheriff was only judge to try the same; and that the trial made by the master did not liberate him, but that the Sheriff might proceed, and ought to be preferred,
