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

Scottish Court of Session Decisions

PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW


To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.


Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.


Thank you for your support!


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Stuart v M'Duff. [1674] Mor 2565 (11 December 1674)
URL: https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1674/Mor0602565-022.html
Cite as: [1674] Mor 2565

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


[1674] Mor 2565      

Subject_1 COMPENSATION - RETENTION.
Subject_2 SECT. III.

Quod statim liquidari potest pro jam liquido habetur.

Stuart
v.
M'Duff

Date: 11 December 1674
Case No. No 22.

An exception of compensation proponed thus, viz. that the pursuer had intromitted with goods belonging to the defender, to the value of the debt, allowed to be verified instanter by writ or oath.


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

In a pursuit for payment of a sum of money, it being alleged, That the pursuer had intromitted with moveables and goods, to the value of the debt libelled pertaining to the defender's father, for whose debt he was pursued; and that it was to be presumed, that he had got the said goods, in satisfaction of the same debt, unless he should allege and prove another cause;

The Lords found, That if the defence should be proponed in these terms, that the pursuer had got the said goods in satisfaction, and that they were data in solutum; the defence ought to be positive, and that the delivery of the goods was probable by witnesses; but the quality foresaid could not be proven otherwise, but by writ or the pursuer's oath: But if the exception was proponed, so as to infer compensation, viz. that the pursuer had intromitted with the said goods to the value of the debt; that it ought to be verified instanter by writ or oath.

Reporter, Castlehill. Clerk, Hamilton. Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 160. Dirleton, No 200. p. 89.

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: https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1674/Mor0602565-022.html