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 >>
David Ramsay v David and William Barrowmans. [1683] Mor 14753 (00 February 1683)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1683/Mor3414753-059.html
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a spuilzie for violent profits, at the instance of the owners of horses seized by some persons at the first rise of the western rebellion,
Alleged for the defenders: That they were secured by the indemnity, and could not be liable in a spuilzie, which is penal; nor yet in simple restitution, seeing the horses were lost, and the defenders made no benefit by them.
Answered for the pursuer: This process being neither vindicta publica, nor privata, but only pretiosa, for damage and interest to a party lesed, it cannot fall under the indemnity. 2do, The horses being robbed, without special warrant of officers, and before they were formed into any companies, the deed must be considered as a private depredation.
The Lords did not sustain the spuilzie as to all the violent profits contained in the decreet; but allowed to the pursuer the prices, with the annual-rent from the time the horses were taken away, and large expenses; and found all the defenders liable in solidum.
