Assignment. In Scotland choses in action may be legally assigned. Intimation to the debtor is necessary to render an assignation valid as against third parties.

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: Assignation

Case	Date	Legal Subject	Abstract
Anderson v. Creditors of Arnot	1792	Arrestment, Trustee, Creditor, Multiple-Poinding, Assignation, Debt	Lilias Anderson, as pursuer, petitioned against an interlocutor issued by Lord Dregborn in her case against the creditors of Arnot. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Bruce v. Cunynghame	1790	Disposition, Freeholder, Charter, Seisin, Sasine, Assignation	James Bruce of Kinnaird petitioned the Court to expunge Sir William Augustus Cunynghame from the freeholders' roll of Stirling, alleging that Cunynghame’s qualification was nominal, fictitious, or held in confidence rather than by real right. Cunynghame answered that his freeholder qualification was genuine and supported by valid titles, a defense joined by David Cunynghame, younger of Livingstone, who asserted that the land titles were fully documented. Bruce replied and Cunynghame duplied, continuing the dispute over whether the enrollment rested on a real or merely nominal qualification.
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.
Dewar v. Howieson	1788	Aliment, Succession, Debt, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Creditor	Mrs Nisbet and her husband petitioned the Court of Session to alter the Lord Justice-Clerk's interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Douglas v. Mason	1796	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Assignation, Bankruptcy, Trustee	Douglas petitioned the Court to alter the interlocutors of Lord Swinton Ordinary in a multiple-poinding process regarding a legacy held by a trustee. Mason argued that an arrestment laid upon the legacy was valid and took priority over an assignation made by a bankrupt son to his mother.
Earl of Rednor v. Macarthur	1791	Succession, Disposition, Trust, Debt, Assignation, Adjudication	Archibald Macarthur Stewart, defender in the action by the Earl of Rednor, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Edmonstone v. Morehead	1790	Freeholder, Disposition, Teinds, Charter, Sasine, Assignation	George Edmonstone, a minister, petitioned the Court to overturn the Stirlingshire freeholders' refusal to admit him to the electoral roll, while William Morehead of Herbertshire defended the decision by challenging Edmonstone's qualification. Edmonstone submitted replies and duplies addressing objections to his qualification, and his agent William Craig filed answers to Morehead's condescendence. The pleadings repeatedly referenced parallel litigation involving Edmonstone's brother Charles Edmonstone and another freeholder, Mr. Cheape.
Harrisons v. Chippendale, Trustee	1792	Bankruptcy, Compensation, Creditor, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Debt	Harrisons, as assignees of Gibson and Johnson, claimed entitlement to rank on the estate of William M'Alpine and Company for the full amount of bills held as security for advances made to the firm. Edward Chippendale, trustee of the estate, argued that this claim was compensated by the value of bills which Gibson and Johnson had accepted and indorsed to M'Alpine and Company. The dispute thus turned on whether the assignees could recover the full amount of their secured debt or whether it was subject to compensation by the firm's separate claims against them.
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.
Inglis v. Bethune	1798	Cautioner, Debt, Assignation, Interlocutor, Bankruptcy, Action	William Inglis petitioned to reverse a court’s finding that defender William Bethune’s 1786 holograph bond was mere corroboration rather than new security, seeking to hold Bethune jointly liable for half the debt. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
John Murray v. James Scott	1794	Feu duties, Teinds, Interlocutor, Feu, Sasine, Assignation	John Murray petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against James Scott. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lamb, et al v. Duncan	1797	Debt, Creditor, Cessio Bonorum, Aliment, Diligence, Assignation	James Lamb, John Robertson, and Alexander Orr petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Glenlee, and James Duncan answered the petition. The dispute concerned whether the Court would vary the prior order, with the petitioners seeking alteration and Duncan resisting the application.
Low v. Knowles	1796	Rent, Sequestration, Tack, Assignation, Caution, Lease	Andrew Knowles defended an action by John Low and John Richardson regarding rent obligations under the Act of Sederunt 1756, maintaining that he was not liable for the full rent in light of prior payments and the pursuers' conduct. He further alleged that Low had failed to pay rents and had caused ruin to the farm, and that the caution found was insufficient to secure future rents. Knowles also petitioned against a Sheriff's interlocutor requiring double caution for the same rents, arguing that such a requirement was unjust and contrary to the spirit of the Act.
Magistrates and Town-Council of Paisley v. M'Dowal et al	1792	Trustees, Assignation, Burgh, Debt, Trustee, Creditor	The Magistrates and Town-Council of Paisley petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor in their action as pursuers seeking indemnity for road repairs executed under the 1753 turnpike act. The defenders William M'Dowal, George Houston, Robert Fulton, Robert Corse, Boyd Porterfield, Boyd Alexander, Archibald Speirs, and the assignees to the tolls answered the petition, resisting the magistrates' request for alteration of the court's prior order.
Manderson v Dickson	1793	Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Assignation	George Manderson reclaimed against Lord Abercromby's interlocutor in his action against Dickson for wrongful imprisonment and damages. The respondents denied liability, attributing the litigation to vexatious conduct by the Manderson brothers and contending that the calculations of damages were frivolous.
McFarlane v. Meadowbank's Interlocutor	1796	Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Oath	The suspender McFarlane petitioned against an interlocutor of Lord Meadowbank, which had found the charger entitled to expenses and appointed an account thereof to be given in. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Mrs. Henderson's Trustees v. J. Tulloch and D. Ross	1832	Succession, Disposition, Trustee, Assignation, Heritor, Aliment
Petition of Robert Gibbon	1787	Debt, Assignation, Creditor, Ranking of Creditors, Bill of Exchange, Sequestration	Robert Gibbon, merchant in Aberdeen, petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Pringle v. Hamilton	1793	Prescription, Bill of Exchange, Debt, Oath, Action, Assignation	Pringle pursued Hamilton for payment of a bill of exchange drawn by David Cathcart in 1762, while Hamilton defended on the grounds that the instrument had not been duly negotiated and that the debt was prescribed. Pringle argued that Hamilton remained liable notwithstanding the alleged defect in negotiation and that the defense of prescription was inapplicable, but Cathcart answered that the debt had been discharged by payment made by his father. Hamilton subsequently petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor.
Proctor v. Carnegy	1796	Disposition, Sasine, Charter, Infeftment, Assignation, Seisin	Patrick Proctor pursued an action against Sir David Carnegie to establish the validity of a sasine, maintaining that the seisin was legally complete without a commission from Lord Strathmore and that the freeholders and Court had improperly rejected his inrolment. Carnegie defended by contending that the commission was an essential part of the title which Proctor had failed to produce to the freeholders, rendering the seisin null. The parties exchanged informations and memorials debating the necessity of the commission and the legal effect of the sasine.
Ralston v. Dreghorn's Interlocuters	1793	Debt, Creditor, Compensation, Bill of Exchange, Assignation, Interlocutor	Robert Ralston, as pursuer, petitioned the court against an interlocutor issued by Lord Dreghorn. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Ramsay v. Lister	1787	Arrestment, Creditor, Diligence, Sequestration, Debt, Assignation	James Lister, Tackman of Pitlessie Mill, as defender, answered the petition of John Ramsay, Brewer in Letham, pursuer, responding to claims of dereliction and mora in arrestment diligence. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Robert Wark v. William Wotherspoon	1830	Expenses, Assignation, Tack, Rent, Interlocutor, Irritancy	William Wotherspoon sought suspension of a decree obtained by Robert Wark ordering him to pay £9, 13s. 5½d. and extract dues. Wotherspoon defended the suspension on the ground that an assignation of lease from Mr Young was necessary for debt recovery, while denying Wark’s allegations of arrears and encroachment. He subsequently lodged a reclaiming note asking the Court to recall the interlocutor and suspend the letters simpliciter, and obtained an additional appendix allowing him to print the defences, replies, condescendence, and answers from the inferior court process.
Shoolbred v. Lindsay	1792	Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Assignment, Assignation, Arrestment	John Shoolbred, trustee for the creditors of Captain Charles Steuart Lindsay, sought to compel Lindsay to assign £40 per annum from his military half-pay pursuant to a court order. Lindsay resisted, maintaining that his half-pay was not assignable to creditors and that Shoolbred’s claim thereto was ineffectual. The case turned on whether half-pay could be made liable to the claims of creditors.
Sir Alexander Mackenzie of Gairloch v. Hector Mackenzie and His Tutor	1768	Debt, Factor, Assignation, Executor, Reduction, Disposition
Stewart, et al v. Lord Swinton's Interlocutor	1789	Arrestment, Sequestration, Debt, Assignation, Creditor, Disposition	Stewart and others petitioned the Court to alter Lord Swinton’s interlocutor regarding the arrestment of goods held in trust for creditors. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
The Trustees of the late Robert Vans Agnew v. Mrs Frances Dunlop or Agnew & Others	1832	Debt, Succession, Disposition, Expenses, Assignation, Legacy	The Trustees of the late Robert Vans Agnew maintained the validity of a disposition dated 1808 against Mrs Frances Dunlop or Agnew and others, lodging an additional appendix to their reclaiming note that asserted the deed remained binding upon the defenders. The Earl of Galloway and J. A. S. M'Kenzie subsequently reclaimed against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Fullerton, petitioning the Court to alter that determination.
Tod v. Thomson	1792	Arrestment, Creditor, Debt, Assignment, Assignation, Witness	Alexander Thomson, defender in the action raised by Tod, petitioned the Court on 2 March 1792 to alter Lord Monboddo's interlocutor against him. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
William Gilmour and Others v. William Finnie and Benjamin Greig	1832	Expenses, Assignation, Credit, Interest, Suspension, Interlocutor	William Finnie and Benjamin Greig, defenders in the action raised by William Gilmour and others, presented a reclaiming note against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Corehouse. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
William Stewart v. Mrs. Garland or Pirie and James Pirie	1831	Succession, Liferent, Assignation, Debt, Tack, Deed	William Stewart, Sheriff-Clerk of Kincardineshire, pursued Mrs. Garland or Pirie and James Pirie for multiple poinding and exoneration of debts owed to the deceased John Pirie, tenant in Cairnbeg. Stewart condescended on the fund in medio against the relict and representatives of the late tenant, and James Pirie subsequently lodged a reclaiming note against Lord Corehouse's interlocutor.
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.
Yorkston, et al. v. Grieve	1794	Deed, Witness, Testament, Succession, Assignation, Executor	Yorkston and his co-petitioners pursued Grieve concerning the validity of a testamentary deed executed by the illiterate Jean Ferguson. They argued that the instrument was valid despite the notary’s docquet failing to record that it was read over to the testatrix, whereas Grieve maintained that because Ferguson could neither read nor write, the deed required to be read to her before she authorized the notary’s signature, and was void for want of that formality.
Young, and Husband v. Sinclair, et al	1796	Debt, Creditor, Assignation, Penalty, Succession, Aliment	Mrs Janet Young and James Riddoch, her husband, sought recovery of the net expenses they had incurred in enforcing payment of an annuity due under a heritable bond. Mrs Janet Sinclair, her husband James Smith, William Innes, and William Innes as Administrator-in-Law resisted, contending that they ought not to be subjected to the expenses of process under a general decerniture for penalty.