AI-transcribed

Trust. A subject is conveyed in trust when the person to whom it is conveyed, and who is called the trustee, does not acquire an unlimited right of property, but holds the subject for the purpose of applying it to certain uses, expressed or implied. Trust is either voluntary, constituted by a disposition of the truster, or judicial. A conveyance in trust is completed by delivery of the moveables and by sasine in the heritage. The completion of the conveyance denudes the truster, and prevents his creditors, or others coming in his place, from attaching anything but the reversionary interest after the purposes of the trust are fulfilled.

Definition source
AI-transcribed
Bell, William, A Dictionary and Digest of the Law of Scotland, 7th ed. rev. George Ross (Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, 1861), s.v. “Trust.” Public domain.

Legal Subject: Trust

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
Abraham Delvalle, and Others v. The Creditors of the York-Buildings Company 1783 Debt, Prescription, Creditor, Sequestration, Trustee, Trust After the York Buildings Company failed, its real property in Scotland became the subject of a ranking of creditors. In this ranking, a group of creditors objected to certain claims that had been submitted. In particular, the creditors made two key objections to claims based on bonds issued by the Company. First, the creditors objected that many bonds had been cut off by the Scottish statute of limitations, or “prescription.” In response, the affected bondholders argued that the prescription should not apply because the debts were still valid in England, where they had been contracted and where the York Buildings Company and its creditors resided. Second, the creditors objected that some bonds had been issued under value and should be ranked accordingly. The affected creditors argued that the bonds were negotiable instruments, and purchasers were entitled to rely on their face value. In the course of the proceedings, both sides filed petitions with the Court of Session.
Alexander Fyffe v. James John Fraser 1832 Debt, Aliment, Arrestment, Succession, Trust, Trustees Dr Alexander Fyffe, surgeon in Haddington and pursuer, presented a reclaiming note asking the Court to alter the interlocutor and remit the bill for suspension and interdict in his case against James John Fraser, defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Alexander Milne v. Freeholders of Aberdeenshire 1791 Freeholder, Adjudication, Liferent, Trust, Prescription, Election contest Alexander Milne, as pursuer, petitioned the Court in June 1791 and again by reclaiming petition in December 1791 to alter a recent interlocutor in his action against the Freeholders of Aberdeenshire. Captain John Gordon subsequently presented his own petition requesting the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in the same cause.
Arbuthnott v. Gilmour 1765 Debt, Adjudication, Succession, Reduction, Creditor, Trust John Arbuthnott petitioned the Court to overturn an interlocutor ordering him to convey a debt and diligence to the representatives of the late James Justice. Elizabeth Gilmour, Justice’s widow, answered, arguing that the assignation to Arbuthnott had been granted as collateral security rather than in trust.
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. Belshes 1793 Aliment, Succession, Trust, Deed, Trustee, Reduction Margaret Bayne and David Miller pursued Sir John Wishart-Belsches and James Knox to challenge the validity of a settlement executed by Thomas Ruthven. Sir John Wishart-Belsches defended the action by asserting that the deed constituted a valid deathbed settlement which Mrs. Bayne had ratified.
Braimer v. Innes and Lothian 1788 Aliment, Debt, Succession, Interdiction, Trustee, Trust John Braimer, late of Edrom, as pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Stonefield's interlocutor, which maintained Braimer's interdiction and declared the trustees not bound to pay over the balance. Gilbert Innes of Stow and John Lothian, merchant in Edinburgh, as defenders, answered the petition, resisting Braimer's claim for reversion and discharge of the interdiction.
Brown v. Brown 1787 Succession, Aliment, Heirship Moveables, Debt, Trust, Heritor Jean Brown petitioned to alter an interlocutor that had ordered her to return a gold watch and gowns to Janet Brown, relict of George Baird, contending that the items were not marital property. Janet Brown answered, defending her claims of inheritance and possession of the heirship-moveables in dispute.
Chatto v. Officers of the State, and Potts 1784 Clause, Ultimus Haeres, Substitute and Conditional Institute, Liferent, Succession, Trust While his natural son William was abroad in Jamaica, John Duncanson of Maxpoffle executed a settlement. The settlement granted Maxpoffle to certain trustees for William’s benefit, and failing William, for the benefit of John Chatto. The settlement also provided that the trustees should denude themselves of their right to the land, in favor of William, upon his return to the country. William returned to Scotland after his father’s death, and the trustees transferred Maxpoffle to him. William later died without issue, and his wife Gallacina Potts was advised that the estate fell to the crown. She therefore applied to the Barons of Exchequer for a gift of bastardy. John Chatto intervened, laying claim to the lands by virtue of John Duncanson’s settlement; Chatto was later permitted to bring a declaratory proceeding before the Court of Session. There, Potts argued that Chatto was a conditional institute rather than a substitute, meaning that he was entitled to inherit only if William predeceased John.
Crawfurd's Trustees v. Hart's Relict 1801 Aliment, Succession, Trustees, Marriage, Adjudication, Trust This case determined whether Janet Hart could claim the legal entitlements available to a widow. Hart cohabited with the decedent, William Crawford, for thirty years and produced children with him. However, the couple declared their marriage just 10 months before Crawford’s death. Under Scots law, this raised the question whether Hart was entitled to the jus relictae—a widow’s right in the movable estate of her deceased spouse.
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.
Duggan v. Wight 1795 Debt, Aliment, Lease, Trust, Tack, Trustee Francis Duggan pursued Alexander Wight regarding the lands of Kevockmill, contesting Lord Elkgrove's title and claiming that Wight held the property in trust for him, asserting a beneficial interest despite his absence from the conveyance. Wight denied serving as trustee and relied upon rent receipts to reject Duggan's claim, citing contradictions and lack of funds. After the court pronounced an interlocutor against him, Duggan reclaimed; subsequently, Wight petitioned with correspondence disputing ownership, and Duggan answered maintaining his trust claim.
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, Fraser, and Ferrier v. Trustees of General Simon Fraser 1791 Debt, Succession, Trustee, Entail, Disposition, Trust Edmonstone, Fraser, and Ferrier pursued the Trustees of General Simon Fraser for payment of a Crown-gifted debt, insisting that the trustees were bound to pay the specified heirs rather than apply the funds to the entailed estate. The trustees maintained that the Crown’s gift of the debt to Archibald Fraser could not be enforced against the entailed estate of Lovat. They subsequently petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in the cause.
Gilbert MacPherson v. John Arrot 1766 Debt, Liferent, Aliment, Succession, Trust, Sequestration Gilbert MacPherson, Writer in Inverary, pursued John Arrot of Foffarty regarding a debt, and Arrot answered the petition, responding to the grounds of debt and the negotiability of the writings. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Gordon v. Traill 1832 Debt, Creditor, Interest, Trust, Lease, Interlocutor William Gordon and others, as pursuers, presented a reclaiming note against an interlocutor pronounced by Lord Mackenzie in their action against the defender Traill. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Grant v. Campbell 1765 Liferent, Aliment, Succession, Trust, Trustee, Assignment Grant, as executor, sued the Campbell heirs for an unpaid marriage settlement that included a mortgage and annuity, the dispute turning on an incomplete conveyance and questions of executor liability. 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.
Helen Fergus or M'Leish, and Husband v. Isobel Fergus or Izat, and Husband 1830 Debt, Succession, Aliment, Trust, Disposition, Liferent Helen Fergus or M'Leish and her husband John M'Leish pursued Isobel Fergus or Izat and her husband John Izat for exhibition of debts and payment from the estate of James Fergus. The defenders counterclaimed that prior payments they had made for M'Leish's debts exceeded the £300 legacy and half of the moveable estate due to them, leaving a balance of £60 1 3 owed by the pursuers. The pursuers maintained the validity of an 1814 settlement and denied allegations of preferential treatment, while the defenders subsequently reclaimed against an interlocutor of the court.
Home v. Purchasers of Renton 1795 Debt, Aliment, Succession, Sequestration, Trust, Creditor Sir John Stirling petitioned the Court to alter a recent interlocutor concerning the entailed Renton estate, seeking authority to disincumber the lands, while George Johnston answered that the entail was valid and the petitioner’s claims lacked legal foundation. Sir Alexander Purves, as Administrator in Law for his children who were heirs of the entail, duplied that the respondents’ conduct in managing the estate had been injurious to the heirs. Dame Mary Willis separately petitioned for permission to pay annuities due under a trust deed executed by Sir Alexander Stirling.
Hope v. Mutter 1797 Aliment, Trust, Sequestration, Warrandice, Infeftment, Caution The defender William Mutter, Esq. petitioned the Court to remit the pursuer Hope's proceedings against him for the lands of Camps, which he claimed to have held in peaceable possession for nearly twenty-four years. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
John Home, Writer to the Signet, Petitioner 1792 Debt, Entail, Succession, Trust, Trustees, Trustee Sir John Stirling, Alexander Grahame, Sir Alexander Purves, Dame Mary Willis, and Dame Gloriana Stirling asked the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in the case in which John Home, Writer to the Signet, appeared as petitioner. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lydia Douglas, and her Husband v. The Trustees of Sir Charles Douglas 1791 Succession, Aliment, Marriage, Trust, Disposition, Mala Fides Lydia Mariana Douglas and her husband pursued the Trustees of Sir Charles Douglas, arguing that a condition in her father's will was void as capricious and unjust. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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.
Macharg and Others v. Macharg and his Curators 1776 Trust, Onus Probandi, Bill of Exchange, Diligence, Debt, Cautioner Archibald McHarg was the ordinary doer of James McHarg of Keirs. When he died, in July 1774, two bills from McHarg of Keirs were in his possession. One, for £230 sterling, was unendorsed and had been accepted by James McHarg in Tairly. The other was for £264 sterling. McHarg of Keirs argued that it was self-evident that Archibald McHarg had held both of these bills in trust: the first to recover payment, the second as a fund of credit. Keirs petitioned the Court to compel the heirs of Archibald McHarg to either deliver these bills to him or destroy them. The defenders, James McHarg, eldest son of Archibald, and his curators, argued that as these bills had been found in the possession of Archibald McHarg, the burden of proof of possession lay on McHarg of Keirs. Lord Monboddo found that the bills had been put into McHarg's hands by Keirs. The defenders gave representation, and then petitioned the Court to review Monboddo's interlocutors. According to marginalia on the case documents, the Court adhered.
Menzies v. Young 1765 Debt, Aliment, Succession, Trust, Trustee, Creditor John Menzies of Pitfodles, an infant represented by his tutor George Turner, sought to restrain the powers of his trustees, contending that the trust-disposition did not authorize them to contract debts for his benefit. Alexander Young, a creditor, argued that debts incurred by Jean Menzies in her capacity as trustee were properly payable from the trust estate. The case thus turned on the extent of trustees' authority to bind an infant's estate and the liability of trust funds for debts so contracted.
Miss Isabella Brown and Mandatary v. J. A. Cheyne and J. M'Kean 1830 Trustee, Ranking and Sale, Creditor, Disposition, Trust, Sasine Miss Isabella Brown sued James Auchinleck Cheyne and John M'Kean for £500 and damages, alleging negligence in the defenders' purchase of Malta Terrace, Edinburgh on her behalf. The defenders answered, denying liability for the alleged negligence in the transaction. The litigation proceeded with reclaiming notes filed by both parties regarding interlocutory orders, including an argument by the defenders that Brown lacked title to maintain the action or to seek relief against their interlocutor.
Miss Margaret Littlejohn, and Others v. James Hamilton 1832 Sequestration, Creditor, Trustee, Debt, Factor, Trust Miss Margaret Littlejohn and others pursued James Hamilton of Kames for sequestration of the rents of his estate and the appointment of a judicial factor. Hamilton answered, arguing that sequestration was unnecessary and incompetent in view of an existing trust arrangement. Heritable creditors subsequently petitioned for authority to let lands in Hamilton's personal possession or for sequestration of the whole estate, and Hamilton filed further answers responding to the application.
Mrs. Jane Lowrey or Maxwell v. Colin Dunlop Donald and Dr King 1830 Trustee, Marriage, Succession, Debt, Aliment, Trust Mrs. Jane Lowrey or Maxwell sued Colin Dunlop Donald and Dr Benjamin Watts King, as trustees and executors of the late John Maxwell Esq., for a declarator that she was his lawful wife and relict, concluding for aliment. The defenders denied the marriage and asserted that the aliment conclusions were incompetent, while Mrs. Lowrey also objected to a petition seeking a curator bonis for her children, insisting upon their legitimacy. She subsequently reclaimed against an interlocutor, asking the Court to alter it and repel the defences of Donald and King.
Palfrey v. Lord Dreghorn's Interlocutor 1796 Debt, Rent, Lease, Trust, Statute, Tack Alexander Wight, Writer to the Signet, petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor that permitted proof by witnesses in the trust action between Palfrey, the pursuer, and Lord Dreghorn, the defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Preston v. Wellwood 1791 Trust, Entail, Debt, Aliment, Succession, Lease Sir Charles Preston and the other trustees appointed by the deceased Robert Wellwood of Garvock sought suspension and interdict against Robert Wellwood, now of Garvock, to prevent him from cutting timber on the entailed estate. Wellwood answered, claiming he was entitled to cut timber on the estate notwithstanding the deeds of entail and trust executed by his father. The trustees maintained that they possessed the exclusive right to prevent the cutting of growing timber in order to preserve the value of the trust estate.
Ramsays v. The Magistrates and Town-Council of Edinburgh 1792 Sequestration, Aliment, Trustees, Trust, Tax, Public Works John Ramsay pursued the Magistrates and Town-Council of Edinburgh, contending that the defenders were bound by statute to take three shops and pay their value or assess recompense. The defenders answered that the pursuer's claim for damages was incompetent and premature under the statute. The case turned on whether the statutory provisions obliged the town to acquire the shops and compensate the pursuer, and whether the remedy was properly raised.
Richard Thomson v. Messrs Douglas, Heron, and Company 1785 Debt, Trust, Sequestration, Fraud, Reduction, Security Richard Thomson of Crowdieknowes transferred his lands to David Armstrong of Kirtleton "heritably and irredeemably," with the qualification that such lands should be sold for Thomson's benefit. Armstrong obtained a charter for the lands without recording the qualification. Armstrong subsequently conveyed the lands to Douglas, Heron, and Company to secure his own debt, and other creditors of Armstrong adjudged the lands. Thomson then initiated a court action to void Armstrong's right to the lands on the ground of fraud. Armstrong's creditors, including Douglas, Heron, and Company, appeared in the suit to defend their interest. Thomson argued that Armstrong held the lands in trust and therefore lacked the power to act as proprietor. In response, the creditors argued that they were entitled to rely on the relevant land records.
Riddell, Petitioner 1798 Sasine, Disposition, Interest, Debt, Trust, Insurance William Riddell, along with Christopher Moubray and separately as trustee for Mrs Charlotte Wood, alias Gillespie, petitioned the Court for authority to distribute proceeds from judicial sales of landed estate. The first petition sought permission to pay a heritable bond secured by lands sold at judicial sale, and a later petition requested warrant for payment of the balance due from the sale of the Craigdarroch estate lands. The litigation thus comprised successive applications for judicial sanction to discharge encumbrances and trust obligations from the sale funds.
Robert Wellwood v. Trustees of the Estate of Robert Wellwood 1796 Debt, Entail, Aliment, Succession, Trust, Deed Robert Wellwood, Esq., as pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter the Lord Justice Clerk's interlocutor continuing an interdict against cutting timber on the estate of Garvock, with the Trustees of the Estate of Robert Wellwood as defenders. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Robertson v. Robertson 1782 Compensation, Trust, Debt, Bankruptcy, Arrestment, Multiple-Poinding The trustees for the creditors of David Sibbald held an auction to sell a portion of Sibbald’s effects. At the auction, John Carnegie purchased a stack of wheat and transferred it to the petitioner, Thomas Robertson. Carnegie and Robertson did not grant a bill to the trustees for the price of the wheat, and the trustees eventually raised an action before the sheriff for payment, damages, and expenses. Robertson raised a counter-proceeding, alleging that the trustees owed him payment for certain business matters. The parties engaged in extensive litigation, leading to an order by the Lord Ordinary stating that Robertson had engaged in “manifestly improper conduct” and finding him liable for expenses. Robertson challenged this order on two grounds. First, he argued that his legal actions were justified. Second, he argued that the trustees were not competent to pursue the action because they had already been denuded of their trust. The trustees disputed these claims.
Rollo v. Irving and Others 1800 Liferent, Succession, Fiar, Trustees, Liferenter, Trust Pursuer Margaret Rollo (alias Houstoun) held stock of the Bank of Scotland in liferent, while the fee interest was held by trustees of her late husband, Alexander Houstoun. When the Bank paid an extraordinary dividend, Mrs. Houstoun brought this case to determine whether the dividend belonged to her (i.e., to the liferenter) or to the trustees.
Seton v. Creditors of Seton 1793 Succession, Debt, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Trust, Aliment Hugh Seton of Touch disputed his creditors' claims to certain assets, arguing that funds held at Boulogne were partnership property of Charles and Hugh Smith and Company rather than his individual estate, and that he retained the fee of an £8000 sterling trust as father notwithstanding the trustees' conveyance to his son. The creditors contended that company creditors who had drawn dividends in France must communicate those amounts before ranking against his Scottish funds.
Steuart v. Craig 1793 Debt, Trust, Creditor, Bankruptcy, Infeftment, Aliment David Steuart, trustee on the sequestrated estate of James Stein, petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor pronounced by the Lord Justice-Clerk, and James Craig, trustee on the sequestrated estate of John Stein, answered that a heritable bond ought to be held in trust for John Stein to the extent of £6,437:7:6. The litigation thus presented a contest between competing trustees regarding the allocation of assets between the two bankrupt estates.
Thomas Dunlop, and Others v. Walter Monteith and Co., and Others 1778 Ranking and Sale, Debt, Bankruptcy, Arrestment, Trust, Trustee This is one of several cases concerning the bankruptcy of James Dunlop Jr. After Dunlop became bankrupt, most of his creditors signed a “deed of concert” in which they agreed to work together to recover their debts. Further, some creditors pursued court adjudications of their debts, including those who had signed the agreement. Eventually, certain creditors initiated a ranking and sale of Dunlop’s estate, and a dispute arose over about whether the creditors should be ranked according to the trust-right or the adjudications.
Trustees of Batties-mains v. Armadale 1800 Trust, Roup, Estate, Roads Mr. Carmichael left the lands known as Batties-mains in his trust for the education of poor scholars at a public school located there. The trust required that the land not be sold, so some of the trustees agreed to rent out parts of the land for a fixed time period to other parties. They subsequently agreed to allow Lord Armadale to build a road through the lands of Batties-mains to his own estate of Smyllum, on the condition that after the renting period was up, he would destroy the road and return the ground to its prior condition. The final trustee to review the agreement, Minister Fergusson, disapproved of a clause which stated that the road would be Lord Armadale's property, and disputed it based on his belief that it undermined the true intent of the original trust.
Trustees of Lady Douglas v. Hutchison 1782 Succession, Trust, Possession, Deed, Witness, Suspension The Trustees of Lady Douglas, as pursuers, submitted a memorial against Hutchison arguing that a deed from William Douglas to his wife Isobel Douglas was valid despite partial obliteration of the testing clause and precept of seisin. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Tyson v. Scott 1770 Trust, Debt, Succession, Legacy, Executor, Power of Attorney Defender Walter Scott was a trustee for the late Thomas Cockburn, writer in Edinburgh. Cockburn originally planned to leave much of his estate to his nephew, John Simpson. Learning of Simpson's shortcomings as a businessperson, Cockburn changed his will to set up a trusteeship. Under the trusteeship, his wife Elisabeth Campbell and his nephew John Simpson would receive annual incomes. Cockburn designed the trusteeship to ward off any of Simpson's creditors. Cockburn died on December 2, 1765. On July 31, 1769, an arrestment was used at the instance of pursuer, Edward Tyson, acting as executor for the late John Watson, merchant in London who claimed to be a creditor of Mr. Simpson and Thomas Young, partner in business to Mr. Simpson. Tyson arrested all of Simpson's goods to cover outstanding debts. Tyson sought to collect assets from the Cockburn estate.
Waugh v. Trustees for Ruecastle's Creditors 1789 Agent, Trust, Process, Proof, Witness, Arrestment Thomas Waugh, writer in Jedburgh, petitioned against a Lord Alva interlocutor, objecting to the admissibility of Andrew Reid as a witness. The Trustees for Ruecastle's Creditors, together with Richard Tod, merchant in Leith, and other creditors of Walter Ruecastle and John Scott, answered the petition, defending Reid's qualification to testify.
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.
York-Buildings Company v. Taylor 1791 Debt, Entail, Succession, Trust, Sale, Trustee Alexander Mackenzie, Writer to the Signet, as defender, submitted minutes in answer to the minutes filed by the pursuer, the Governor and Company of Undertakers for raising Thames Water in York-buildings. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.

Documents discussing this subject (showing 100 of 500)