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 >>
Sir William Scot v William Nisbet. [1688] Mor 5011 (19 July 1688)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1688/Mor1205011-008.html Cite as:
[1688] Mor 5011
Subject_1 GENERAL ASSIGNATION. Subject_2 SECT. II.
Relative to Thirlage. - Legacies. - General Clauses in Assignations. - What a General Assignation will carry.
Sir William Scot v. William Nisbet
Date: 19 July 1688 Case No. No 8.
A disposition of all debts, bonds, obligations, and sums of money contained in an inventory, found not to carry money in the repositories of the deceast.
Arrears of rent found to be comprehended under the word debts.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The case of Sir William Scot of Harden and his Lady, against William Nisbet of Dirleton, was reported by Stair, (Justice-Clerk,) whether Sir John Nisbet's disposition of all debts, bonds, obligations, and sums of money contained in an inventary, was taxative, or demonstrative, so as to reach and carry the money lying beside him the time of his decease.——The Lords found that it did not extend thereto; so the money, which was about 10,000 merks, fell to his daughter as his heir of line, nearest of kin and executor. Then she claimed the bygone rests in the tenants hands, unuplifted or not discharged by him before his death, on this ground, that in a former disposition he had expressed this, and having omitted them here, it must be presumed to be de industria, seeing so eminent a lawyer knew the import of these clauses. This being also reported on the 27th July, the Lords found these rents fell under the general words of debts inserted in the disposition, and so belonged to William Nisbet, the heir of tailzie. Then they debated that she getting the moveables ought to pay the funeral charges, as was found in the Dutchess of Lauderdale's case.*—Answered, William's disposition was burdened with the debt. —Replied, That must be understood only in suo ordine after discussing of the moveables.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 339. Fountainhall, v. 1. p. 512.
