| Competition Among the Creditors of Macfarlane |
1766
|
Debt, Arrestment, Shipping, Aliment, Interlocutor, Creditor |
This case was a dispute among the creditors of David Macfarlane, a merchant of St. Christophers (St. Kitts). In 1764, Macfarlane sent a shipment of sugar from St. Croix to Port Glasgow, consigning it to James King. Macfarlane instructed King to sell the sugar and apply the proceeds to pay certain of Macfarlane’s creditors, who were set forth in a list. When the sugar arrived in Scotland, however, some of Macfarlane’s creditors sought an arrestment. This led to a competition among Macfarlane’s creditors. In the course of the proceeding, the Lord Ordinary ruled that the consigned sugar could not be arrested, and a group of joint petitioners sought review. In August 1766, the Court of Session ruled against them. In November 1766, Messrs. Greenshiels and Wardrope petitioned the court again, this time on their own, arguing that they should be treated differently from other creditors because they did not receive notice of the shipment. In December 1766 the Court adhered to its earlier interlocutor. |
| Crawford v. Boyd |
1765
|
Debt, Shipping, Interlocutor, Oath, Creditor, Adjudication |
Hugh Crawfurd, James and William Aitkens, Hector Fairie, John Fisher, John Crawfurd, and Hugh Craig petitioned the Court to remit an interlocutor finding them liable for goods shipped at the Isle of Man on their account. John Boyd and others, as executors-creditors of Patrick Ewing, answered, contending that the obligation letters were not probative of delivery or receipt. The litigation thus turned on the evidentiary sufficiency of the obligation letters to support the finding of liability. |
