AI-transcribed

An action for "reducing," i.e., cancelling a deed, or will, or setting aside a decree of a Court. In a "reduction improbation" the deed, &c., is set aside if not produced, as fully as if produced and proved invalid.

Definition source
Kinnear, J. B., Digest of House of Lords Cases Decided on Appeal from Scotland, 1709-1864 — Glossary of Scottish Law Terms (Edinburgh, 1865). Public domain.

Legal Subject: Reduction

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
Alexander Geddes and Allan Clark v. Jean Bull 1796 Marriage, Adjudication, Legitimacy, Reduction, Succession, Disposition Alexander Geddes and Allan Clarke petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutor in their action against Jean Bull. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Andrew Zuill v. Thomas Bryce Buchanan 1830 Sequestration, Interlocutor, Liferent, Rent, Reduction, Infeftment Andrew Zuill or Yool, farmer at Bridgend of Boquhan, raised an action of reduction against Thomas Bryce Buchanan to set aside sheriff's decrees and interlocutors obtained for unpaid farm rents and damages, alleging the proceedings were invalid and unlawful. Buchanan reclaimed against Lord Mackenzie's interlocutor and lodged defences asserting his heritable proprietorship and the validity of a liferent grant to William Gray. Zuill subsequently reclaimed, arguing that Buchanan possessed title to demand the rents during his possession of the subjects.
Archer v. Lord Eskgrove's Interlocutor 1793 Cautioner, Creditor, Reduction, Interlocutor, Succession, Bankruptcy
Bayne and Miller v. Wisheart-Belshes 1792 Succession, Aliment, Trustee, Reduction, Fraud, Cautioner Margaret Bayne and David Miller, baker in Perth, objected to the examination of James Dick Junior as a witness for Sir John Wisheart-Belshes in the process against him, arguing that Dick was disqualified by interest and relation. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Belsches v. Paterson and Anderson 1786 Tack, Thirlage, Interlocutor, Decreet-Arbitral, Charter, Reduction Robert Belsches pursued the action against Mrs Mary Paterson and Alexander Farquharson regarding the extent of thirlage over the lands of Greenyards. Belsches argued that the thirlage did not extend to wheat or barley, while Paterson and Farquharson maintained that the lands of Easter Greenyards were thirled to the mill of Skeoch for omnia grana crescentia.
Black v. Allason 1788 Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Disposition, Reduction, Sasine William Black, carrier and portioner in Falkirk and pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against defender Allason. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Campbell v. Easterby 1797 Arrestment, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Reduction, Interlocutor James Campbell petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor regarding an arrested vessel, and George Easterby answered, arguing that Campbell’s bond of caution did not conform to the Admiral’s interlocutor and that the arrestment had caused no diminution in the ship’s value. The dispute thus turned on the sufficiency of the security offered and the effect of the seizure upon the vessel’s valuation.
Chrystie and Chrystie v. Ferguson, et al 1788 Election contest, Decreet-Arbitral, Reduction, Election, Bribery, Corruption Alexander Chrystie and another pursued Ferguson and others to reduce and set aside the election of the Magistrates and Counsellors of Burntisland, alleging bribery, corruption, and invalid form. The defenders answered, maintaining the validity of the 1789 election and arguing that a majority of uncorrupted votes sustained the result.
Counsellors of the Burgh of Burntisland 1789 Election contest, Magistrate, Election, Aliment, Decreet-Arbitral, Reduction The Provost, magistrates, and counsellors of Burntisland defended the validity of the burgh’s 1789 election of counsellors against complaints alleging bribery and seeking voidance or partial relief. Alexander Pitcairn petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor that had ruled against his election as a counsellor, while William Muir and James Davidson also pursued complaints regarding the election, prompting answers from the magistrates and subsequent duplies. The magistrates later submitted a memorial arguing that Muir and Davidson’s election was void due to their non-residence and foreign status.
Creditors of Dunbar v. Grant 1793 Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Adjudication, Reduction, Arrestment Alexander Penrose Cuming and other creditors of Thomas Dunbar of Westfield had obtained an interlocutor voiding, under the 1621 Act, a bond of corroboration granted by the bankrupt to Sir James Grant of Grant, Baronet, as a fraudulent preference. Grant petitioned for reconsideration, contending the bond was merely a lawful acknowledgment of debt and not a preference. The creditors answered, defending the interlocutor and responding to Grant's claims regarding the validity of the instrument.
Creditors of Newlands v. Mackenzie 1792 Creditor, Debt, Proof, Arrestment, Reduction, Bill of Exchange Andrew Mackenzie petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor requiring him to produce title-deeds before receiving payment of his account. The creditors of Newlands answered that Mackenzie ought to be paid without producing the writings.
Cunynnghame v. Whitefood, et al 1797 Succession, Deed, Aliment, Disposition, Reduction, Minor Lieutenant Colonel Francis Cunynghame pursued James Whitefoord and others, seeking to set aside a settlement executed by Whitefoord in 1792 while he was a minor. Cunynghame argued that the deed was void because a minor could not alter the succession to heritable estate established by the former proprietor, and further contended that the settlement lacked proper delivery. The litigation raised the question of whether a minor's deed could effectively convey or settle heritable property.
Dickie v. Lord Henderland's Interlocutor 1789 Reduction, Succession, Improbation, Feu duties, Disposition, Liferent Patrick Dickie, eldest lawful son of William Dickie and pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against Lord Henderland. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Elliot and Others v. Dickieson 1793 Teinds, Stipend, Tack, Heritor, Reduction, Augmentation Elliot and Others raised a process to prove the tenor of a 1635 decree concerning teinds valuation against the Reverend Mr Benjamin Dickieson, seeking to have that valuation declared binding and perpetual. Dickieson defended by memorial, alleging that the process was vitiated by intrinsic nullities and defective adminicles. The pursuers replied, insisting upon the decree's validity and adducing evidence of its draft, handwriting, and prior references from 1736.
Falconer v. Dreghorn's Interlocuters 1793 Debt, Aliment, Creditor, Arbitration, Reduction, Factor Loco Tutoris George Gordon Falconer petitioned the Court to alter the interlocutor of Lord Dreghorn upholding an arbitral decree against Mrs Katharine Thomson. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Frank and his Tutor v. Frank, et al. 1793 Witness, Succession, Reduction, Aliment, Deed, Forgery Frank and his Tutor sought to reduce a disposition granted by the deceased Charles Frank in February 1791 in favor of the defenders. The defenders argued that the instrumentary witnesses to the deed were incompetent to depose whether they saw the party subscribe, while the pursuers challenged the competency of Janet Smith, a witness for the defenders, on the ground that her annuity depended upon the validity of the deed, and petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor refusing to admit her. The pursuers subsequently presented a formal petition for reduction and annulment of the disposition.
Gentle and Gentle v. Belch 1787 Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction Robert Gentle and William Gentle, as pursuers, argued against defender Belch that thirteen bills of exchange bearing their names were forged and void. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hawkins and Bruce v. Hamilton 1789 Succession, Debt, Trust, Executor, Aliment, Reduction Hawkins and Bruce raised an action against Archibald Hamilton, writer in Hamilton, as executor, seeking to hold him liable for his intromissions with the testator's estate. The defender argued that he was not liable for intromissions made beyond his lawful authority under the will. After an Inner-House interlocutor found him liable for his intromissions with the pursuers' funds, he presented a reclaiming petition asking the Court to alter that finding.
Hay v. Thomson 1787 Debt, Creditor, Reduction, Assignation, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy John Hay, trustee for the creditors of D. Loch, petitioned the Court of Session to alter Lord Rockville’s interlocutor, arguing that a 1770 assignation was void as a fraudulent preference under the 1696 Act because it was intimated after bankruptcy and constituted a fraud against Loch’s other creditors. James Thomson and the creditors of St Clair & Co. answered, contesting the validity of the translation and assignation under the statute. Hay petitioned again to alter the court’s interlocutor, maintaining that the assignation was an illegal preference.
Henry Peirse and Others v. Mrs Elizabeth Ross 1791 Adjudication, Conveyance, Infeftment, Security, Heritor, Reduction Mrs Elizabeth Ross defended her adjudication of multiple Ayrshire lands against objections by Henry Peirse and others, asserting her right as heir and the validity of her Crown charter in response to their claims of prior or superior rights. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hugh Montgomery v. Strang, Lennox and Company 1798 Decreet-Arbitral, Tack, Arbitration, Usury, Reduction, Interlocutor Strang, Lennox and Company, cotton-spinners in Eaglesham, petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor respecting their claim for damages against Hugh Montgomery of Bogstown, suspender, arising from a prior loan and arbitration dispute. Montgomery submitted answers opposing the chargers' application.
Janet Kyle and Her Trustees v. William Allan, Adam White and Others 1816 Reduction, Trustee, Debt, Creditor, Succession, Aliment Janet Kyle (also called Jessie Kyle) and her Trustees brought a summons of reduction against Adam White and other defenders, seeking to set aside the contract of April 20, 1811. White lodged preliminary and substantive defences denying the validity of the reduction and asserting that he was a bona fide purchaser of the rights in question. The cause proceeded to an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Mackenzie, against which the pursuers reclaimed.
John Ballenden v. The Duke of Argyle 1791 Feu duties, Interlocutor, Infeftment, Charter, Reduction, Irritancy John Ballenden petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor and subsequently petitioned against an Inner-house interlocutor, seeking reversal of the orders. The Duke of Argyll answered, resisting Ballenden's arguments that the interlocutor should be altered.
John Finlay and Others v. John Newbigging and Others 1792 Debt, Aliment, Corporation, Reduction, Succession, Election contest John Finlay and other weavers petitioned the Court to overturn Lord Ankerville’s interlocutor, alleging that reformers within the Incorporation of Weavers in Lanark had illegally excluded them and misused funds in violation of the by-laws. John Newbigging and other members answered, maintaining that the respondents possessed no right to expel members for non-payment of assessments.
John Gordon of Auchanachy v. Grizel Ogilvie 1757 Succession, Debt, Disposition, Infeftment, Prescription, Reduction John Gordon of Auchanachy, pursuer, and his trustee Alexander Gordon of Whiteley, Advocate, challenged the title of Grizel, Katharine, and Anne Ogilvie, daughters of John Ogilvy, to the Estate of Balbegno, arguing that the defenders' claim founded on a 1713 obligation of their mother Elizabeth Middleton was voidable on grounds of prescription and res judicata. The defenders maintained that the pursuer was barred from reducing their infeftment by ratified obligations binding his parents and by forty years' prescription, while the pursuer contended that he was not subject to his father's debts and that a prior decreet-absolvitor against Lady Auchanachy did not bar the present action. The parties exchanged memorials and answers disputing the validity of a 1709 estate settlement, the production of evidence, and allegations of fraud and misconduct in the original disposition.
Loch, et al v. Lord Hailes' Interlocutor 1789 Suspension, Interlocutor, Res judicata, Inhibition, Reduction, Declinator John Loch, Esq., and others petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor of Lord Hailes concerning the quartering of soldiers in Caltonhill. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
M'Callum, et al v. Hunter, et al 1786 Debt, Fraud, Creditor, Insurance, Reduction, Sequestration The creditors of Kenneth M'Callum pursued Robert Hunter and other London underwriters to recover the sum insured on the ship *New York*. The underwriters alleged that the vessel had been wilfully destroyed by its owners to defraud them and resisted payment. The creditors maintained that the policy remained valid and that M'Callum bore no liability for the loss.
Mackay and Fullerton v. Dalrymples et al 1795 Succession, Possession, Reduction, Entail, Prescription, Sequestration Mrs Marianne Mackay, subsequently the Honourable Mrs Hamilton Fullarton, and her husband Colonel William Fullarton pursued Sir Hew Hamilton Dalrymple and other representatives of the Dalrymple family regarding succession to the estate of Bargeny, asserting rights as nearest substitutes under a 1688 marriage contract and entail which provided for female-line succession, while the defenders claimed title under a 1742 charter and seisin. The litigation involved petitions for sequestration of the estate, disputes over the custody of title-deeds and the removal of seals from estate repositories, and exchanges regarding the pursuers' standing to displace the defenders as heirs-apparent, the validity of a plea of minority, and allegations of contravention of irritant clauses. The pursuers sought to compel production of writings relied upon by the defenders and to conjoin reduction and declarator processes to ascertain their position under the entail, while the defenders maintained their lawful possession and disputed the pursuers' entitlement to the succession.
MacLaggan v. Heritors of Melrose 1780 Aliment, Heritor, Reduction, Glebe, Suspension, Interlocutor Digitization in Progress
Marquis of Lorne, et al v. Denny, et al 1796 Election contest, Interlocutor, Election, Reduction, Burgess, Appeal The Marquis of Lorne and others pursued John Denny and others regarding the Michaelmas 1796 burgh election in Dumbarton, seeking to overturn the minutes that recorded John Dixon’s vote as valid and asserting a majority victory despite the contested proxy. The defenders answered that the pursuers’ voters lacked burgess qualification, and subsequently argued that Provost Lorne possessed no voting right and that key electors were not burgesses, ultimately demanding a poll election.
McNish v. Scougal and Ogilvy 1787 Witness, Deed, Reduction, Cautioner, Improbation, Act of Parliament John M'Nish pursued the reduction of a bond of caution he had granted to Messrs Scougal and Ogilvy, merchants in Leith, contending that the deed was void for lack of witnesses to his subscription and because he had not acknowledged his signature at the time of execution. Scougal and Ogilvy argued that the bond remained valid despite M'Nish's denial and the absence of attesting witnesses. The parties filed opposing informations regarding the formal validity of the instrument.
Monro v. Sutherlands and Sutherland 1793 Debt, Creditor, Reduction, Rent, Aliment, Sequestration William Ross Monro pursued an action against the heirs of John Sutherland and Ann Ross regarding debts Monro had owed to his uncle. William Ross of Aldie submitted a memorial arguing that the Court should not revive the tenor of unproduced obligations without proof of a special casus amissionis. The respondents challenged a decree in the suit, maintaining that prescription and a prior settlement barred the claim.
Mrs A. V. S. T. Anderson v. John Anderson 1827 Reduction, Tailzie, Entail, Succession, Aliment, Expenses Mrs A. V. S. T. Anderson, pursuer, lodged a reclaiming note against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Moncreiff in her action against John Anderson, defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Mrs. Weatherstone and Others v. Marquis of Tweedale and Others 1813 Teinds, Stipend, Valuation, Reduction, Heritor, Interlocutor Mrs. Weatherstone and others, as reclaimers, sought relief for over-payments made in the process of locality of the Parish of Channelkirk against the Marquis of Tweedale and others, as respondents. The respondents contended that the claimants were barred from recovering such over-payments unless they could prove the payments had been made by themselves or their direct predecessors. They further argued that the Teind-clerk's accounting practices for heritors lacked fixed principles and that equitable considerations must be applied to the claim.
Murdoch v. Lord Dunsinnan's Interlocutor 1787 Decreet-Arbitral, Arbitration, Reduction, Interlocutor, Intromission, Suspension Elizabeth Murdoch, Alexander Smith, Jean Murdoch, and Christian Murdoch petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dunsinnan's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Murdoch v. Lord Rockville's Interlocutor 1791 Reduction, Disposition, Insanity, Verdict, Interlocutor, Infeftment William Murdoch petitioned the Court to alter Lord Rockville's interlocutor, which required him to extract proceedings from Cupar in an action of reduction. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Myles v. Lyall 1797 Reduction, Debt, Bankruptcy, Cautioner, Interlocutor, Creditor Alexander Lyall, as cautioner, sought relief from liability against Myles under a bond limited to the Admiral’s decree, contending that the obligation did not extend to a later Court of Session reduction. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Ogilvie v. Mercer 1793 Succession, Deed, Reduction, Disposition, Entail, Tailzie Sir John Ogilvy of Invercarity, Hope Stewart of Ballechin, and Miss Margaret Mercer Elphinstone challenged the validity of a deed of entail executed by Robert Mercer on 22 February 1791, arguing that it was void as a death‑bed settlement. Katharine Mercer subsequently petitioned the Court to alter the interlocutor pronounced in the case.
Rankine and Son v. Belch 1790 Creditor, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Reduction, Promissory note Defender Peter Belch argued that the indorsement by Rankine and Son was genuine and that he held no material interest in the matter, as he would recover value from David Mitchell, who had received full value. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Remington, Crawford, and Company, and Others v. Mrs. and Miss Bruce and Sir Michael Bruce and Others 1824 Debt, Creditor, Succession, Reduction, Aliment, Expenses Remington, Crawford, and Company and other creditors pursued Mrs. Bruce, Miss Bruce, and Sir Michael Bruce to reduce an 1819 land disposition favoring the heirs, alleging it created unlawful preferences prejudicial to onerous debts. The defenders initially asserted that gratuitous provisions must be postponed to onerous creditors while seeking assoilziment, later maintaining that their securities derived from the free residue of the estate and were irreducible. The pursuers sought reduction of the mortis causa provisions while conceding the debtor's solvency, and argued that as onerous creditors they were entitled to preference over the gratuitous legatees.
Riddell v. Grosset 1791 Tack, Reduction, Rent, Agent, Aliment, Damages Sir James Riddell petitioned the Court of Session to apply the judgment of the House of Lords reversing the interlocutor that assoilzied him from the process of reduction against Grosset. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Shiells v. Lord Duncan's Interlocutor 1788 Suspension, Reduction, Citation, Interlocutor, Caution, Exhibition Shiells, as petitioners, challenged Lord Dunfinnan’s interlocutor, arguing that a suspender could proceed as pursuer without awaiting the charger’s mora and that a late protestation could not invalidate prior steps. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Simpson v. Morison, and Glass and Son 1786 Debt, Creditor, Reduction, Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Aliment Elisabeth Simpson, spouse of James Davidson, petitioned the Court to remit an interlocutor of Lord Alva that had allowed the reduction of her husband's land disposition. William Morison, late maltman in Stirling, and John Glass and Son, merchants there and Morison's assignees, answered the petition on behalf of themselves and Davidson for his interest.
Sir Alexander Mackenzie of Gairloch v. Hector Mackenzie and His Tutor 1768 Debt, Factor, Assignation, Executor, Reduction, Disposition
Stewart v. Magistrates and Town Council of St. Andrews 1792 Election contest, Suspension, Reduction, Interdict, Election, Interlocutor Robert Stewart, claiming to be the duly elected Deacon of the Incorporation of Wrights in St Andrews, petitioned the Court to set aside the election of John Edie and declare his own title valid, alleging that Edie’s election was voided by a court interdict and insufficient legal votes. The Magistrates and Town Council of St Andrews defended Edie’s election as lawful and accused Stewart of unlawful usurpation of the office. The litigation proceeded through successive petitions and answers, with Stewart additionally moving the Court to alter interlocutors regarding expenses and other procedural orders.
Susanna Vere v. The Earl of Hyndford, and Others 1791 Deed, Reduction, Aliment, Succession, Arbitration, Adjudication Susanna Vere pursued the Earl of Hyndford, John Hamilton of Westburn, William Porteous of Carmacoup, John Bannatyne of Castlebank, and Robert Bell regarding the authority to control the proceedings of tutors, and the defenders argued that Vere possessed no power to impose a negative upon such proceedings. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Thomsons v. Campbell 1789 Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Reduction, Multiple-Poinding, Interdict, Arrestment Andrew, George, and Andrew Thomsons petitioned the Court to alter Lord Monboddo's interlocutor. Neil Campbell of Inverliver answered, arguing that the petitioners had misstated the grounds of suspension and the nature of his plea.
William Yeats v. Alexander Thomson and Others 1829 Reduction, Creditor, Trust, Expenses, Trustees, Trustee William Yeats pursued Alexander Thomson and others to reduce a pretended will dated 1 April 1829. In July 1832, Yeats and James Wilson presented a reclaiming note asking the Court to recall Lord Moncreiff's interlocutor and reduce the defenders' liability.
Woddrop v. Finlay 1793 Decreet-Arbitral, Tack, Arbitration, Interlocutor, Reduction, Debt John Finlay, defender, answered the petition of William Woddrop, pursuer, arguing that the interlocutor should not be altered and that the arbiters’ explanation was necessary to ascertain material justice. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
York Building Company v. Roperhead 1791 Debt, Sequestration, Assignment, Assignation, Creditor, Reduction The Governor and Company of Undertakers for Raising the Thames Water in York Buildings petitioned the Court against Roperhead to find that assignees of bonds must take every objection competent against the cedent. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.