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 >> Hadden v Haliburton. [1676] Mor 9794 (15 February 1676)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1676/Mor2309794-124.html
Cite as: [1676] Mor 9794

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


[1676] Mor 9794      

Subject_1 PASSIVE TITLE.
Subject_2 DIVISION II.

Lucrative Successor post contractum debitum.
Subject_3 SECTION II.

How far the Disposition must be onerous, to elide the Passive Title.

Hadden
v.
Haliburton

Date: 15 February 1676
Case No. No 124.

Where there is an onerous cause, altho' not fully equal to the worth of the lands, the disponee is liable only in valorem.

See in the next case, that if the cause onerous be inconsiderable, a passive title will be incurred.


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

Patrick Hadden pursues George Haliburton as lucrative successor to his mother, by a disposition granted by her to him of lands wherein he was alioqui successurus, after contracting of the pursuer's debt, who alleged absolvitor, because the disposition bears to be for sums of money, and so is not lucrative but onerous. It was answered, That the narrative of the disposition proves not betwixt mother and son. Whereupon it was alleged by the defender, That any colourable title was sufficient to purge the passive universal title, but the pursuer might reduce upon the act of Parliament; 2do, The cause onerous was offered to be proven.

The Lords found, that the disposition, with an onerous narrative betwixt mother and son, did not prove; but found, that if the cause onerous were proven, though not equal to the worth of the land, the defender should not be found simply liable, but quoad valorem in quantum lucratus est, without necessity of a reduction. See Proof.

Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 37. Stair, v. 2. p. 416.

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/1676/Mor2309794-124.html