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 >> Robert Craig, v The Creditors of Riccartonholm. [1783] Mor 272 (25 January 1783)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1783/Mor0100272-042.html
Cite as: [1783] Mor 272

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


[1783] Mor 272      

Subject_1 ADJUDICATION and APPRISING.
Subject_2 RANKING of ADJUDGERS and APPRISERS.

Robert Craig,
v.
The Creditors of Riccartonholm

Date: 25 January 1783
Case No. No 42.

Adjudication, led after decreet of certification has been extracted, found entitled to no preference in the ranking.


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

In the ranking of the creditors of Riccartonholm, the Lord Ordinary found, “That Robert Craig's adjudication having been led after the process of ranking, in which he produced his interest, had been brought into Court, and a decreet of certification pronounced and extracted, he is not entitled to any preference in virtue of such adjudication, and ought, therefore, to be ranked as a personal creditor.”

Against this judgment, Robert Craig reclaimed, and

Pleaded: Adjudications, with the exception arising from the statute 1661, in favour of those which are led within year and day of the first effectual one, are to be considered as sales under redemption, which are preferable according to their priority; nor have the acts 1681 and 1690, authorising the sale of bankrupt-estates, introduced any alteration in this respect. From the nature of this diligence, therefore, no reason can be assigned why the petitioner, upon the production of his decreet of adjudication, should not be preferred to those who either have not adjudged at all, or have taken this measure posterior to him.

The penal effects of a decreet of certification, in cases of this sort, are confined solely to those rights affecting the estate under sale, which existed, and could have been produced when it was pronounced; and no benefit can be derived from thence by creditors who have not been preferred in the ranking. Hence the preference of those rights which have been acquired after the decreet was pronounced, and of those creditors who have no real lien over the estate, must be the same as if it had never taken place. Indeed, were the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor well founded, as a decreet of certification may be obtained in a period far short of a year, it would be in the power of an adjudging creditor to exclude the operation of the statute 1661.

This petition was refused, without answers.

Lord Ordinary, Elliock. For Robert Craig, Cha. Hay. Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 14. Fac. Col. No. 83. p. 130.

*** This decision afterwards accounted erroneous. See No 43. immediately following.

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/1783/Mor0100272-042.html