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 >> Sir Henry Home v Sir Alexander Home. [1666] Mor 1312 (14 June 1666)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1666/Mor0301312-045.html
Cite as: [1666] Mor 1312

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


[1666] Mor 1312      

Subject_1 BASE INFEFTMENT.
Subject_2 SECT. VII.

Whether a Father's possession validates a base right in favour of his Son.

Sir Henry Home
v.
Sir Alexander Home

Date: 14 June 1666
Case No. No 45.

Found in conformity with No 43. p. 1311.


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

In the cause between these parties, Stair, v. 1. p. 375. voce Possessory Judgement; it was further alleged, for Sir Alexander Home, That the rebel had not only five years possession, but was infeft by an infeftment holden of his father, which was clad with possession, before the apprizer's charge against the superior; in so far as the infeftment bore a reservation of the father's liferent; and so the father's possession was the rebel's possession, and was sufficient to validate the base infeftment; seeing there could be no other possession attained, during his father's lifetime; or at least, there was reserved to the father an yearly rent, and the rebel gave his father a warrant in writ to continue his possession, of such of the lands for the same.

The Lords ordained the donatar to condescend, whether the rebel's infeftment proceeded upon his contract of marriage; and he declaring that it was by a distinct right, thereafter,

The Lords found the possession of the father not relevant, it being betwixt conjunct persons, private, and suspect: For they thought, if possession by such reservation, betwixt father and son were sufficient, the creditors would hardly be secure.

Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 90. Stair, v. 1. p. 376.

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/1666/Mor0301312-045.html