If you found BAILII useful today, could you please make a contribution?

Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, 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!


BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> L. of Dunduff v L. of Craigie. [1612] Mor 3843 (13 March 1612)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1612/Mor0903843-023.html
Cite as: [1612] Mor 3843

[New search] [View without highlighting] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1612] Mor 3843      

Subject_1 EXECUTOR.
Subject_2 SECT. IV.

An Executor has the only Title to Intromit with the Subjects Confirmed.

L of Dunduff
v.
L of Craigie.

Date: 13 March 1612
Case No. No 23.

The relict has no action against the defunct's debtors for her third; she must pursue the executors, or if there are no executors, she must confirm herself executrix-creditrix. See No 30. p. 3848.


Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

The Laird of Dunduff, as executor nominated by the young Lady Craigie, and having licence, pursued the auld Laird of Craigie for the third of such debts and sums of money as were owing to the young Laird of Craigie, her first husband, to the third whereof she had right, as his relict. It was alleged, that she could have no process, in respect young Craigie's testament was not confirmed. So the pursuer answered, that he could not be prejudged by the not confirmation of young Craigie's testament, seeing the delay thereof proceeded not of her default, but by the defender old Craigie, who was tutor to his oyes (grandchildren) who should confirm their umquhile father's testament. Nevertheless The Lords considering that the relict could fall nothing by her defunct husband, but the third of his free gear, which could not be known but by confirmation of her husband's testament, that she behoved to urge the confirmation thereof; and albeit she might have retention of her umquhile husband's goods, being in her hands for her third thereof, yet she could not have action for her third of the goods against any other, till the testament was confirmed.

Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 273. Haddington, MS. No 2437.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1612/Mor0903843-023.html