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 >> John Halyburton v John Watson. [1674] 2 Brn 175 (6 January 1674) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1674/Brn020175-0423.html Cite as: [1674] 2 Brn 175 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1674] 2 Brn 175
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JAMES DALRYMPLE OF STAIR.
Date: John Halyburton
v.
John Watson
6 January 1674 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
John Halyburton pursues John Watson and Grissel Ogilvie his spouse, for payment of a legacy of £5000, left by Henry Thomson to Cicill Thomson,
spouse to Halyburton. It was alleged, No process; because, by an Act of Sederunt in June 1672, All summonses are appointed to proceed upon twenty-one days' citation; and that no writer should insert any privilege, except the particular causes mentioned in the Act; whereof actions of executors against legators are none. It was answered, That the defenders live in Edinburgh; and there was a special privilege to cite parties in Edinburgh on twenty-four hours, which was neither mentioned nor taken off by the Act of Sederunt, and had been accustomed by the Lords since. It was replied, There was no exception, in the Act, of that privilege. The Lords found no process, but resolved to consider how far they would allow the privilege of citation within Edinburgh: whether only as to the second summons, this being the first summons; or when, by their own deliverance in præsentia, and not of course: But, having considered the Act the next day, they found it took not away the privilege of citation within Edinburgh, as to causes that, before that Act, were accustomed to be executed in Edinburgh, and that upon such time as was accustomed: And granted process. Vol. II, Page 247.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
