Legal Subject: Burden of Proof |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Countess of Sutherland v. Dunbar | 1783 | Register of Sasines (Deeds), Burden of Proof, Presumption, Debt, Adjudication, Register | In a ranking and sale, William Dunbar of Fulfordlees submitted a claim based on a heritable bond of corroboration. The petitioners objected to Dunbar’s claim on the ground that the seisin (possession of land by freehold) on the bond was not properly registered. In particular, they argued that there was no evidence that the seisin had been registered within the legally prescribed time period. In response, Dunbar produced an extract from the Inverness burgh register. The extract showed that the seisin had been recorded without a date, like other registrations from the same time period. According to Dunbar, this established a presumption that the seisin was timely registered, and it was the petitioners’ burden to rebut that presumption. |
Documents discussing this subject (37)
- Abram Houston v. James M'Millan — Answers, 25 May 1824
- Alexander Charles Maitland v. Dame Helen Maitland Gibson and Sir Alexander Charles Maitland Gibson — Reclaiming Note, 27 Dec 1830
- Andrew Watson v. John Scouller and Others — Answers, 29 Jun 1824 [2]
- Answers — Ans.—James Duguid to the Pet.—Geo. Kinloch J. & T. Peat, Respondents' Agents
- Archibald Graham v. William Gillespie and Company — Information, 9 Apr 1794
- Clark v. Bell — Petition, 30 Nov 1802
- Cowan v. Mac Candlish — Petition, 21 Dec 1770
- David Turnbull v. James Rankine, John Rankine, and John Black — Proof
- Dugald Campbell v. Hugh Price; James Stevenson; James Alexander — Replies, 1827
- Evander M'Iver Reid v. William Steel — Reclaiming Petition
- Henderson & Sellar v. James Smith — Answers, 2 Jan 1806
- Hugh Rose of Glastullich v. Donald M'Leod of Geanies — Answers, 4 Feb 1824
- Hugh Stevenson v. John Campbell — Answers, 21 Nov 1780
- Hunter — Petition, 27 Nov 1793
- James Bell v. Isobel King — Memorial, 15 Dec 1796
- James Bruce of Kinnaird v. Sir William Augustus Cunynghame — Answers, 22 Feb 1791
- James Douglas v. Alexander Rae — Answers, 20 Jun 1737
- James Petrie and Edmond Ward v. George Aitchison and Company — Reclaiming Note, 1 Dec 1840
- John Calder v. John Mitchell and Thomas Gray — Answers, 4 Feb 1822
- John Gibson and Another v. Robert Macgregor — Reclaiming Note, 2 Sep 1830
- LC Volume 01 — Petition, 2 Apr 1807 [2]
- Lewis-Alexander Duff v. Sir Archibald Grant — Information, 21 Dec 1798
- M19-1780s doc0009
- Mess. James Scrimgeour and Son v. William Alexander and Sons — Memorial, 18 Jul 1770
- Mess. William Alexander and Sons v. James Scrimgeour and Son — Memorial, 28 Feb 1771
- Messrs Wilson & Corse v. John Woods — Memorial, 7 Jun 1797
- Mr Stewart-Nicolson v. Mrs Stewart-Nicolson — Replies, 13 Jun 1770
- Murdo Mackenzie v. Johnston & Sime — Case, 24 Feb 1831
- Murdoch Fearns and Company v. Andrew Jack, George Bogle, Robert Dunlop, and John Gordon — Answers, 2 Jan 1796
- Petition — John Simpson against Lord Succoth and Lord Meadowbank's Interlocutor
- Petition — Monkland Canal Company against Lord Meadowbank's Interlocutor
- Reclaiming Petition — Alex. Campbell against Lord Balgray's Interlocutor
- Reclaiming Petition — Allan Maclean against Inner-House Interlocutor
- RECORD. No. I. NOTE OF ADVOCATION. INTERLOCUTOR.
- S. Parker, Francis Garden, and David Macculloch v. Mess. Potts, Cooke, and Potts — Answers, 19 Apr 1810 [2]
- Thomas Bishop and Edward Railton v. Directors of the Mersey and Clyde Steam Navigation Company — Replies, 18 May 1826 [2]
- William M'Gavin v. John Haigh — Answers, 17 Jun 1817 [2]