1794
TackLeasePossessionSuccessionAdjudicationDispositionJames Waddel pursued John Brown concerning a lease of burgage subjects, seeking to determine whether such a lease bound a singular successor under the Act of 1449 without regard to the purchaser's knowledge. Waddel, by his agent Robert Craigie, petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor and either grant decree in terms of the libel or ordain Brown to answer facts and produce correspondence. Brown responded by information, arguing that a lease of burgage subjects was binding against a singular successor under the 1449 Act regardless of whether the purchaser had notice of it.AI-generated
Documents in this case (2)
- Waddel — Petition, 5 Jul 1794April 24, 1794 Petition of Ro. Craigie asking the Court to alter its interlocutor and decern in terms of the libel, or to appoint the defender to answer facts and produce correspondence
- James Waddel v. John Brown — Answers, 4 Sep 1794September 4, 1794 Information of the respondent, arguing that a lease of burgage subjects is binding against a singular successor under the act 1449, regardless of whether the purchaser was in knowledge of it.
People & places in this case
People involved
- James Waddel — Party
- Dr. James Finlayson, Reverend — Party
- John Clerk, Lord Eldin — Advocate for Party
- Sir John Connell — Advocate for Party
- William Baillie, Lord Polkemmet — Lord Ordinary
Where this case took place
Published Reports
William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 10309
| 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. |
