1791–1793
ArrestmentDebtCreditorJurisdictionCautionerOathArchibald Forbes, creditor of Alexander Robertson, pursued the Magistrates of Canongate for unlawfully releasing Robertson from imprisonment for debt, alleging the liberation contravened the 1671 Act because the health certificate was unsworn and granted unrestricted liberty. The magistrates answered that they had not breached the act, maintaining that Robertson’s health had been sufficiently established by certificates on soul and conscience.AI-generated
Documents in this case (7)
- Archibald Forbes v. Magistrates of the Canongate — Answers, 24 May 1791May 24, 1791 Answers by the Magistrates of Canongate to the petition of Archibald Forbes, arguing that the Magistrates did not breach the act of federunt, as the prisoner's health was sufficiently established by certifi…
- Archibald Forbes v. Magistrates of Canongate — Condescendence, 28 Jun 1791 [2]Forbes sues Canongate magistrates for debt owed by Alexander Robertson, claiming unlawful release contravening 1671 Act due to unsworn certificate and unrestricted liberty.
People & places in this case
People involved
- Charles Hope, Lord Granton — Advocate for Party
- RO. Forsyth — Advocate for Party
- George Andrew — Advocate for Party
- George Fergusson, of Hermand, Lord Hermand — Advocate for Party
Where this case took place
Published Reports
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 11762
| The information regarding this case was derived from an import courteously provided by the Baillii Database of Scottish Court of Session Decisions. In terms of the SCOS project, this databases uses respective BAILII entries as metadata shells for case materials present in the SCOS project partners respective repositories. |
