Adjudication of Bankruptcy. Also the appointment by the Court of a receiver of the rents and profits of an estate pending litigation of the title. SEQUESTRATION FOR RENT; Distress by a landlord.

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: Sequestration

Case	Date	Legal Subject	Abstract
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.
Archers and Others v. Magistrates of Edinburg	1797	Statute, Fraud, Act of Parliament, Sequestration, Trust, Tax	James and Andrew Archers, John Hardy, and William Younger, brewers operating within the precincts of Holyroodhouse, pursued the magistrates of Edinburgh and Alexander Thomson to contest the legality of a two-penny duty imposed on ale brewed and consumed in the Abbey, maintaining that the magistrates lacked authority to levy the tax within that jurisdiction. The brewers claimed total exemption from the duty, which the chargers subsequently challenged as legally unsound and unjust.
Bayne v. Wallace	1796	Teinds, Disposition, Feu, Feu duties, Tack, Sequestration	Alexander Bayne of Rires presented a reclaiming petition asking the Court to alter an interlocutor previously pronounced by Lord Craig. John Wallace of Sprettyhall and Rires Mill answered the petition as defender.
Belch [Belsh] v. Wilson and Son	1788	Arrestment, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Forgery, Debt, Sequestration	Peter Belsh, a merchant in Stirling, charged William Wilson and Son, merchants in Bannockburn, over a discounted bill involving indorsers. Wilson and Son suspended the charge and subsequently submitted an information contending that their subscription to the promissory note was a forgery and therefore void.
Bernard Love v. George Foster	1832	Arrestment, Sequestration, Rent, Caution, Aliment, Factor	Bernard Love, as pursuer, lodged a reclaiming note against Lord Moncreiff's interlocutor in his action against George Foster, defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Burt v. Lord Justice Clerk's Interlocutor	1789	Succession, Aliment, Debt, Creditor, Sequestration, Defamation	Robert Burt petitioned the Court of Session to alter an interlocutor that the Court had pronounced against the Lord Justice Clerk. 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.
Campbell v. Laidlaw	1796	Debt, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration, Partnership, Interlocutor	Robert Campbell, as pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor suspending his charge for a bill of exchange he had accepted without value in the action against Laidlaw, the defender. Robert Corbet thereafter informed the Court that the bill had been accepted for the accommodation of Archibald M'Ausland rather than Milligan and Co.
Carnegie v. Turnbull	1796	Freeholder, Election contest, Aliment, Sequestration, Disposition, Freehold Qualification	Carnegie complained of his removal from the roll of freeholders, arguing that he had departed the meeting before being called to take the trust oath and that no formal intimation had been given. Turnbull answered that Carnegie had been struck off for evading the oath after warning, and further asserted that Carnegie had divested himself of all land in the county prior to appearing at Forfar to assert a vote, thereby denying his qualification.
Chisholm v. Lord Gardenston's Interlocutor	1791	Aliment, Heritor, Contract, Tack, Adjudication, Sequestration	William Chisholm petitioned the Court to alter Lord Gardenston's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Copland v. Ireland	1786	Proof, Interlocutor, Tack, Diligence, Rent, Sequestration	William Ireland petitioned the Court for leave to adduce additional proof and to renew diligence against William Birtwhistle, alleging that William Copland of Gregory had failed to report proof regarding Birtwhistle. Copland answered, responding to the claim that he had neglected to report the proof concerning Birtwhistle.
Countess of Loudon, and Others v. The Trustees on the High Roads in Ayrshire	1792	Jurisdiction, Trustees, Appeal, Sequestration, Act of Parliament, Adjudication	The Countess of Loudoun and others pursued the Trustees on the High Roads in Ayrshire regarding the proposed suppression of the road by Crawfordland-bridge, while the Trustees and associated justices of the peace defended the road's continued operation. The Trustees initially challenged the Court's jurisdiction to review their proceedings, then argued in subsequent pleadings that the road served public convenience and must be kept open. The parties exchanged answers, replies, and duplies contesting both the Court's authority to intervene and whether the road should remain open or be suppressed.
Cowan v. Farie and Others	1781	Sequestration	Robert Cowan and Company, creditors on a bill accepted by John Farie, sought to have Farie’s movable effects sequestrated. Cowan & Co. argued that sequestration was appropriate when a debtor’s movable estate was the subject of a poinding or when the debtor was imprisoned; both criteria applied to Farie. The respondents opposed sequestration on several grounds, including the following: (1) Farie received no value for the bill; (2) Farie was under interdiction when he accepted the bill; and (3) Farie’s movable estate was exhausted by higher-ranked creditors. When the case was argued, the parties agreed to suspend the proceeding while the respondents found caution for Farie’s debt. However, after a dispute about the form of the caution, Cowan & Co. submitted a second petition for sequestration and expenses.
Creditors of Jackson and Esten v. Kemble (Two Folders)	1793	Patent, Creditor, Sequestration, Interdict, Trust, Lease	The creditors of Jackson and Esten petitioned for possession of the Edinburgh Theatre in order to manage the property under a disputed patent held by Mrs Esten. Kemble, defending as lessee and trustee of the Theatre Royal, resisted the grant of an interdict against his possession, asserting his lawful title and the public interest and arguing that the Court ought first to investigate the validity of Mrs Esten's patent claim before removing him from the theatre.
Creditors of John Horn	1791	Sequestration, Creditor, Trustee, Adjudication, Interlocutor, Statute	George Wilson, trustee for the creditors of John Horn, petitioned to alter an interlocutor allowing individual creditors to adjudicate post-sequestration, citing statutory prohibition and the risk of confusion or penalty preference. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Curtis, et al. v. Chippendale	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Compensation, Bill of Exchange	William Curtis, Ebenezer Maitland, and John Newman Caussmaker petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor regarding Edward Chippendale's claim as trustee on the sequestrated estate of William Macalpin and Company. The parties disputed whether Scottish law on compensation ought to be altered to conform to English practice, with the respondent defending the established Scottish doctrine and the petitioners arguing that Chippendale's claim was not well founded under that law.
David Clyne v. James Trail and David Hendersson, (Williamson's Trustees)	1830	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Assignation, Trustee, Sequestration	David Clyne raised a summons of forthcoming against James Traill, trustee for the creditors of the late Lieutenant-Colonel Benjamin Williamson, and David Henderson, factor, to recover funds held in trust for Kenneth Fraser. Traill and Henderson defended the action on the ground that they were not in possession of the funds at the time of the arrestment. They subsequently lodged a reclaiming note asking the Court to alter the interlocutor of which they complained.
Donald McDonald v. His Creditors	1780	Debt, Bankruptcy, Aliment, Sequestration, Arrestment, Creditor	Documents are available. Full description in progress.
Douglas, Heron, & Company v. William Riddick	1791	Debt, Arrestment, Cautioner, Creditor, Prescription, Sequestration	William Riddick, as defender, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn’s interlocutor against him at the instance of Douglas, Heron, & Company, arguing that the bond in question fell under the septennial limitation for cautionary engagements and that the decree lacked valid diligence. The respondents answered, asserting that the bond was not for immediate debt and that Riddick was barred from the benefit of the limitation by dolo. Riddick thereafter petitioned the Inner House to overturn its interlocutor on the ground that the cautionary obligation was subject to the septennial limitation.
Drummond and Drummond, et al v. Barton, et al.	1793	Bankruptcy, Debt, Ranking of Creditors, Sequestration, Trustee, Creditor	The pursuers, as common agent and creditors of Hugh Seton, argued against Barton, et al that company-creditors who drew dividends in France must communicate those sums before ranking on Seton’s Scottish funds. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Drummonds v. Seton, et al	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Liferent, Creditor, Trustees, Sequestration	Robert and Henry Drummonds, creditors of Hugh Seton, disputed with Archibald Seton, Hugh’s heir-male, over whether the liferent of a dividend from Hugh’s insolvent estate belonged to the creditors at large or to Archibald as heir. The Drummonds argued that Archibald could not rank for dividend until the full £8000 marriage provision was paid, or that he could be ranked for no more than the value of his father’s liferent-right as a debt in diem, while Archibald petitioned to reclaim the dividend, contending that trustees had to be satisfied from the marriage contract debt before creditors could claim the liferent. Robert Blair separately petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor, and the parties further disputed whether Hugh’s liferent right was vested and unconditional or conditional upon payment of the marriage provision.
Dunmore v. Trustee for Buchanans	1796	Bankruptcy, Sequestration, Contract, Debt, Creditor, Trustee	Robert Dunmore, Esq. petitioned the Court of Session to alter a recent interlocutor pronounced in his litigation against the Trustee for Buchanans. He submitted an initial petition on 15 February 1797 seeking this relief, and subsequently presented an additional petition on 4 March 1797 reiterating his request that the Court modify its order.
Edie, Laird, and Others v. Lord Craig's Interlocutor	1794	Creditor, Ranking of Creditors, Disposition, Interlocutor, Sequestration, Teinds	Edie, Laird, and others challenged Lord Craig's interlocutor ranking creditors' claims on Kerse lands, contending that objections to Elizabeth Dickie, Janet Gray, and Elizabeth Weir were wrongly omitted and that representation was valid under the Act of Sederunt. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Faculty of Advocates v. Rae	1832	Bankruptcy, Debt, Fraud, Creditor, Arrestment, Sequestration	The Dean and Faculty of Advocates opposed William Rae's admission to the Faculty on Trial, arguing that he should not be admitted to the Office of Advocate notwithstanding a remit previously granted in his favor. Rae answered the Faculty's allegations, defending his qualifications and right to admission against their opposition.
Folsetter and Wright v. Lord Justice Clerk's Interlocutor	1786	Apprentice, Contract, Theft, Interlocutor, Sequestration, Fraud	William Folsetter and James Cobban petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Justice Clerk's interlocutor on the bills. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Forbes and Others v. Forrester & co	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Trustee, Creditor, Sequestration, Factor	Sir William Forbes and others, as pursuers, sought to establish Alexander Nairne as the proper trustee for the sequestrated estate of Peter Forrester and Company, while the creditors of that estate contended that Robert Forrester should be confirmed as trustee under the statute governing sequestrated estates. The parties presented competing memorials advancing their respective candidates for the office.
Francis Garbet and Company v. Their Creditors	1772	Bankruptcy, Sequestration	Francis Garbet, Charles Gascoigne, and Peter Capper entered into a partnership under the name Francis Garbet and Company. The partnership was in the business of conveying goods to and from London and other places along the coast of England. Due to financial difficulty, Gascoigne applied to the court to sequester the whole personal estate belonging to the partners and to appoint a factor to manage the partnership's property so that timely payments could be made to the partnership's creditors. George Home was appointed factor on the sequestration. Gascoigne then sought to withdraw or amend the application by claiming that he was unaware of the effect of this sequestration under Scots law, having received his formal education and training in England. Under the law of Scotland, creditors of a company can claim not only the company's property, but the personal property of the individual partners as well. Under the law of England, in contrast, creditors of a company can only draw on the personal property of the individual partners after private creditors of the individual partners have been satisfied. The partners of Francis Garbet and Company sought to sequester the partnership's estate only, not the individual estates of the partners.
Fraser, et al v. Sprott	1796	Common Law, Gambling, Interdict, Bankruptcy, Sequestration, Creditor	Patrick Frazer, Walter Berry, and Henry Farquharson pursued a process to remit a Magistrates' interdict against their private lottery, arguing that such lotteries were not prohibited by statute or common law. The respondent Sprott opposed the remit, contending that private lotteries constituted unlawful gaming and were injurious to public order and fair trade. The dispute centered on whether private lotteries were legally permissible or prohibited as harmful to the public.
George Crichton v. William Bell and William Downe Gillon	1832	Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Arrestment, Sequestration, Trustee	George Crichton pursued William Bell and William Downe Gillon regarding expenses. After Lord Mackenzie pronounced an interlocutor finding that no expenses were due to either party, Bell reclaimed against that determination, submitting notes asking the Court to alter the finding and declare him entitled to his expenses or to remit them when taxed.
George v. Christie	1788	Sequestration, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Aliment	George sought restitution of barley he had delivered to Alexander Dewar, an insolvent debtor who was actively seeking sequestration, alleging that Dewar had acted in mala fide. William Christie, a Stirling merchant, petitioned to alter the court’s interlocutor, asserting that his bill for the barley equated to cash and that he stood as a common creditor. The creditors of Dewar’s sequestrated estate answered Christie’s condescendence, contending that the grain had been fraudulently delivered to the bankrupt.
Gordon of Cluny v. John Anderson	1801	Lease, Damages, Interlocutor, Tack, Sequestration, Arrestment	Lieutenant-Colonel John Gordon of Cluny raised an action of damages against John Anderson and others, seeking reparation for their failure to use the fodder of the way-going crop in accordance with lease regulations. The defenders lodged additional defences maintaining that the action was incompetent, and subsequently argued that the pursuer had no equitable claim for straw lost due to interdict and that they were entitled to be assoilzied. The litigation concerned the application of lease regulations to the fodder of the last crop following a House of Lords judgment on the interpretation of the lease.
Gordon v. Representatives of Michie	1794	Tack, Possession, Rent, Liferent, Heritor, Sequestration	Gordon pursued the Representatives of Michie regarding possession of the Craig of Clunie lands. The petitioners, as heirs of a liferent-tacksman, maintained that they were entitled to continue in possession without summary removal, arguing that the law presumed tacit agreement and required warning before ejection. They initially submitted a memorial advancing this principle, and subsequently petitioned for an order permitting them to remain in possession and restraining the respondents from entering and inclosing the grounds.
Gourlay v. Glen	1786	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Interlocutor, Promissory note, Sequestration	David Gourlay of Kipdarroch, Deputy-Collector of Supply for the County of Stirling, pursued William Glen regarding competing claims to funds held by John Campbell. The dispute concerned priority between Gourlay’s revenue claim and Glen’s claim to a debt due from John Price. Gourlay initially petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor sustaining Campbell’s defence against Glen; Glen subsequently petitioned to reverse Lord Swinton’s interlocutor decerning against him, and Gourlay answered, maintaining his priority over the consigned funds.
Grinlay &c v. Lord Gardenstone's Interlocutor	1792	Arrestment, Sequestration, Hypothec, Roup, Possession, Rent	Grinlay and others petitioned the court to revise Lord Gardenstone’s interlocutor, arguing that as bona fide purchasers at public sale they were not liable for furniture from Mrs. Campbell and that the sheriff’s rent preference was improper. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hamilton v. MacTaggart	1793	Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration, Deed	William M'Taggart answered the petition of Messrs. Hamilton and Co. and James Provan and Co., who claimed that a sale of goods was void under the 1696 Act. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Harrisons v. Chippendale	1794	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Trustee, Creditor, Bill of Exchange	The trustee argued that the Harrisons' claims were invalid for lack of indorsement and because they were founded upon post-bankruptcy acknowledgments. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hay v. Watson	1832	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Trustee, Creditor, Election contest	John Hay, stockbroker in Edinburgh, as pursuer, lodged a reclaiming note against the interlocutor finding the defender, Ebenezer Watson, duly elected trustee on the sequestrated estate of Robert M'Laren. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Hunt v. Wilson and Robb	1786	Arrestment, Diligence, Sist, Sequestration, Debt, Lis Alibi Pendens	John Wilson and James Robb, as present Provost and Jailor, argued that they were not liable to William Love because a lis pendens barred diligence from the pursuer Hunt’s bill-chamber appearance. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Inglis v. Lord Dreghorn's Interlocutor	1789	Aliment, Oath, Arrestment, Creditor, Advocation, Sequestration	John Inglis petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Jack and Others v. Murdoch, Fearns and Company	1795	Insurance, Bill of Exchange, Adjudication, Debt, Sequestration, Oath	Digitization and description in progress.
James Blyth v. Maberly's Assignees	1832	Bankruptcy, Interdict, Sequestration, Arrestment, Debt, Creditor	James Blyth, as agent for John Maberly and Company and as holder of funds belonging to the firm, raised an action of multiplepoinding against Maberly's assignees to require them to produce their rights to the fund in his custody, while simultaneously seeking suspension of a warrant of seizure obtained by the assignees from the English bankruptcy court. The assignees demanded delivery of the property, disputing interdicts and asserting exclusive bankruptcy jurisdiction over all assets, and subsequently argued that the multiplepoinding was incompetent and unnecessary because the question of possession was already properly raised under the bill of suspension. The dispute thus centered on the conflict between Scottish multiplepoinding procedure and English bankruptcy jurisdiction.
James Duff and William Duff v. Laurence Sutherland	1793	Arrestment, Decreet-Arbitral, Debt, Assignation, Magistrate, Sequestration	James Duff in Nethertown and William Duff in Hillockhead of Glass pursued Laurence Sutherland, bailie of Elgin, for obstructing the execution of a caption and withholding consigned money and papers. The complainers asked the court to remit the bailie’s conduct, while Sutherland defended his refusal to incarcerate the debtor and retain the funds, asserting that the complaint was incompetent and that his actions were proper given the complainers’ unlawful proceedings and acquiescence in their own error. He further answered claims of damages and wrongful seizure, maintaining that his conduct had been justified under the circumstances.
James Henderson v. William Scott	1792	Arrestment, Sequestration, Aliment, Interlocutor, Jurisdiction, Damages	James Henderson raised an action against William Scott, alleging that the defender had unlawfully detained his property and imprisoned him without warrant. Scott, acting in his capacity as Procurator-Fiscal, laid an information contending that the defender had acted unlawfully in detaining a ring found in Berwick.
James Lee v. The Executors of Robert Watson	1794	Debt, Bankruptcy, Creditor, Aliment, Sequestration, Succession	James Lee pursued the executors of Robert Watson for payment of a deed of provision he had purchased at public roup from the creditors of a bankrupt. Jean Watson petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor and remit the claim against her for the unpaid moiety of her provision, and the executors separately petitioned for alteration of the same interlocutor. Lee argued that retention of the provision for Mrs. Lumsdain’s aliment was not competent against the creditors of her bankrupt husband.
James Turnbull and Malcolm Macdonald v. Sir George Home, Baronet	1793	Jurisdiction, Suspension, Arrestment, Proof, Sequestration, Interdict	James Turnbull and Malcolm Macdonald, as suspenders, sought to compel their bound apprentice Alexander M'Kenzie to return to service and argued that he could not legally enter His Majesty's Fleet as a volunteer. Sir George Home, Baronet, maintained that a seaman formerly apprenticed to a slater might lawfully serve in the Fleet notwithstanding the opposition of his former masters. The dispute turned on whether an apprentice bound to a slater could voluntarily enter naval service or remained subject to his masters' claim for specific performance of the indenture.
Jamieson, et al v. Andrew, et al	1786	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Aliment, Factor	John Jamieson and other creditors of Gavin Kempt petitioned the Court to overturn the election of James Campbell as interim factor, alleging that James Kempt’s creditor claim—which supported his vote in that election—was fraudulent and self-serving. George Andrew, as factor for Henry Greig, James Kempt, and other creditors of Gavin Kempt, answered the petition, defending the validity of Kempt’s vote.
John C. Farquharson v. John Thomson (Trustee of Mason, Baird, and Co.)	1832	Bankruptcy, Debt, Sequestration, Creditor, Trustee, Fraud
Jowett, et al v. Wooley & Maidment	1797	Debt, Arrestment, Sequestration, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Aliment	Wooley and Maidment, as respondents, contested the debt-related arrest and flight charge brought by Jowett and his co-petitioners, claiming their detention was unlawful despite multiple warrants and asserting that they lacked fugitive status after forty days abroad. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Kincaid v. Lord Justic Clerk's Interlocutor	1808	Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Oath, Cautioner, Fraud	Kincaid sought suspension of a charge brought against him upon a bill, alleging that the drawer had already paid the debt and that the charger and drawer had fraudulently attempted to extort double payment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Laing v. Watson and Mollison	1788	Debt, Arrestment, Sequestration, Creditor, Cautioner, Bankruptcy	Patrick Laing, tanner and burgess of Brechin, pursued Watson and Mollison, arguing that he had been wrongfully imprisoned and that the defenders acted with malice and without legal justification. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.