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 >>
Manner v Davidson. [1682] Mor 3201 (00 February 1682)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1682/Mor0803201-022.html Cite as:
[1682] Mor 3201
Whether competent to children born post bæreditatem delatam?
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A mother having taken a bond bearing annualrent, and an obligement to infeft, to herself in liferent, and to her second son in fee, and the heirs of his body; which failing, to such of his brothers and sisters, and their children, as she should name in his lifetime; he died without children, after he had made a nomination on death-bed. The eldest brother, who was debtor in the bond, raised reduction of the nomination ex capite lecti, as done to the prejudice of him as heir of conquest, at least as one of the heirs substitute in the bond.
Alleged for the defender; That the clause to infeft could not make the bond be repute conquest, no infeftment having followed; 2do, The act of Parliament anent the disposing in prejudice of heirs, ought to be understood of heirs general, not of heirs substitute, who might be otherwise strangers.
The Lords found, That a person on death-bed could not prejudge heirs substitute more than other heirs ; and found, that the pursuer was one of the substitutes, and that the nomination on death-bed was invalid; and that therefore the whole brothers and sisters, and their children born, when hæreditas was delata, came in as substitute, and per capita; but that those born post hæreditatem delatam by the death of George the creditor, were not to be reputed substitutes. But this last point was but overly reasoned. It was much debated that the brothers, &c. were not called substitutes in the bond, but only the creditor was by his faculty to determine the substitutes; and so the brothers not nominate could not be looked on as heirs, and consequently could not quarrel ex capite lecti.
