AI-transcribed

frequently abbreviated into CESSIO. A judicial procedure resembling that under the Insolvency Acts. It can be commenced only by a debtor who is or has been under, or is threatened with, arrest. The debtor is examined in Court, after notice to his creditors, and the Court may then pronounce decree of cessio, the effect of which is to free the debtor from liability to arrest for any prior debt, and to transfer his whole property, present and future, to a trustee, for payment of his creditors. The income of a benefice, salary of an office, half-pay of an officer, &c., are subject to this decree, such portion only being reserved to the debtor as in the opinion of the Court is necessary for his sustenance.

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: Cessio Bonorum

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
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.
Lamont v. His Creditors 1781 Cessio Bonorum, Fraudulent-Bankrupt, Debt, Bankruptcy, Bill of Exchange, Tack Pursuer Robert Lamont, who was imprisoned in the Tolbooth of Canongate, brought an action of cessio bonorum (voluntary surrender of goods) against his creditors. The creditors objected on the grounds that Lamont: (1) Improperly fled the country after selling his livestock and carrying off his effects; (2) Fraudulently disposed of produce that had been promised to one of the creditors; (3) Failed to prove his losses; and (4) Failed to account for large sums of money that he inherited.
Macdonald and Duff v. Doig 1792 Debt, Cessio Bonorum, Property, Trust, Bankruptcy, Arrestment David Doig petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor concerning repayment of a debt. Janet Macdonald and John Duff defended against the petition, asserting that their antenuptial contract validly excluded Duff’s creditors from her property.
McMinn v. His Creditors 1777 Cessio Bonorum, Prisoner, Fraud, Debt, Bankruptcy, Interlocutor Around June of 1777 John McMinn, late chapman in Kirkcudbright, was imprisoned in the Wigtown tolbooth for unpaid debts. He then brought a process of Cessio Bonorum to the Court of Session, and the Court granted him the benefit of the Cessio. In response, McMinn's creditors petitioned the Court to recall this interlocutor. They argued that there were a number of relevant facts that McMinn had withheld from the Court regarding his ability to pay his creditors. Furthermore, the petitioners argued against the supposed liberality with which chapmans were granted the Cessio. For example, while McMinn claimed to have lost his pocket-book in Ireland, the petitioners had recently discovered that while in Ireland McMinn had purchased 15 pounds worth of salt. For this reason, the creditors wrote, they decided to oppose McMinn's process of Cessio Bonorum. "Had the petitioners, upon looking into [McMinn's affairs], been convinced that the pursuer was a poor and unfortunate bankrupt, they would have been the last persons in the world who would have opposed his Cessio : But as this did by no means appear to them to be the case, they thought themselves bound to state those objections which occurred to his obtaining it.”
Reid v. His Creditors 1774 Cessio Bonorum, Debt, Arrestment, Adjudication, Rent, Aliment Patrick Reid, who lived in Hillend, was incarcerated in the tolbooth of Glasgow at the instance of John Aitcheson of Rochsolloch, to whom he owed rent. Reid brought a process of cessio bonorum, which was a means of escaping imprisonment by surrendering his effects. Aitcheson initially did not oppose the process, and the Lords of Session found in Reid’s favor. However, Aitcheson later sought review, claiming that because he lived in the country, he had not had sufficient time to respond. Aitcheson objected that Reid had sold off certain cattle without including their price in an inventory of his debts and effects. In response, Reid argued that Aitcheson’s petition was untimely. He also claimed that Aitcheson had already obtained security for the debt from cautioner Andrew Mitchel, and that Reid never owned as many cattle as Aitcheson alleged.

Documents discussing this subject (54)