AI-transcribed

Seisin. (See Title to Land.)

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: Sasine

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
Adam Livingston, Esq. of Bantaskine v. Sir Thomas Dundas, Bart. 1790 Possession, Feu duties, Infeftment, Disposition, Sasine, Charter Adam Livingston of Bantaskine petitioned the Court to overturn the Michaelmas head court's decision striking him from the roll of freeholders for Stirlingshire, asserting his qualification through possession of the two merk land of Kipdarroch. Sir Thomas Dundas resisted the petition, answering that Livingston never possessed the lands, which had been held by the Gourlay family and Mr Moir of Leckie under Crown tenure since the preceding century. The parties exchanged replies and answers regarding the title to stand upon the roll, and Dundas additionally petitioned the Court to alter its interlocutor, contending that statutory prescription did not bar inquiry into the possession of the lands.
Alexander Bennet v. David Maxwell 1787 Tack, Arrestment, Debt, Lease, Rent, Sasine Alexander Bennet, as pursuer, challenged a tenant’s missive as invalid for lacking formality or stamp, and David Maxwell, as defender, responded asserting the missive’s validity under pacta esse servanda. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Alexander-James Grant v. Countess of Sutherland 1773 Debt, Adjudication, Ranking of Creditors, Sequestration, Sasine, Title Alexander-James Grant petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor concerning the ranking of creditors. The Countess of Sutherland and her Tutors answered the petition, defending the existing determination of priority.
Anderson v. Izat 1781 Ministers Stipend, Rent, Stipend, Sasine, Teinds, Patronage This case was about a dispute over a minister's stipend in the newly formed parish of Gorbals.
Anderson v. Saunders 1829 Sasine, Interdict, Aliment, Feu, Interlocutor, Possession James Anderson and others raised an action of suspension and interdict against Robert Saunders concerning Saunders’ obstruction of a common stair leading to Anderson’s cellars and back-green, which Saunders used to access a sunk storey via a locked spar-door. Saunders answered the reasons of suspension and interdict, resisting the claims of nuisance and exclusive use. Following an interlocutor by Lord Medwyn, Ordinary, Anderson reclaimed against the decision, and Saunders subsequently appealed the interdict and suspension order barring his access. Both parties then submitted Cases arguing their competing rights to the stair, with Anderson contending that Saunders had no right to shut up the common passage and Saunders seeking alteration of the interlocutor granting the interdict against him.
Bell v. Magistrates of Glasgow 1776 Property, Sasine, Interlocutor, Adjudication, Aliment, Arrestment Pursuer Patrick Bell was the proprietor of a piece of land called Bellshaugh or Provost Haugh, situated along the River Clyde near Glasgow Green. Additionally, Bell claimed to own a small strip of land that was used for access to Bellshaugh. The magistrates of Glasgow purchased property on either side of this strip and sought to enclose the entire area. Bell protested, and the magistrates proposed two possible solutions. First, citing an Act of Parliament, they offered to build a fence on either side of the road and charge Bell for half of the construction cost. Alternatively, they proposed to erect a gate that could be used to access the road. Bell refused both proposals, claiming that the cited statute did not apply and that he had an absolute right to exclude the magistrates. The magistrates maintained that either accommodation—the fence or the gate—would be reasonable and equitable; they also suggested that Bell might only hold a servitude.
Benjamin Greig v. John Scott 1829 Debt, Arrestment, Creditor, Disposition, Sasine, Sale Benjamin Greig, as pursuer, sought declarator, multiplepoinding, and exoneration against defender John Scott with respect to lands conveyed under bond to secure a £3000 debt, following unsuccessful sale attempts and disputes regarding title. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Black v. Allason 1788 Bankruptcy, Debt, Creditor, Disposition, Reduction, Sasine William Black, carrier and portioner in Falkirk and pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor against defender Allason. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Bruce v. Cunynghame 1790 Disposition, Freeholder, Charter, Seisin, Sasine, Assignation James Bruce of Kinnaird petitioned the Court to expunge Sir William Augustus Cunynghame from the freeholders' roll of Stirling, alleging that Cunynghame’s qualification was nominal, fictitious, or held in confidence rather than by real right. Cunynghame answered that his freeholder qualification was genuine and supported by valid titles, a defense joined by David Cunynghame, younger of Livingstone, who asserted that the land titles were fully documented. Bruce replied and Cunynghame duplied, continuing the dispute over whether the enrollment rested on a real or merely nominal qualification.
Bruce v. Davidson 1791 Valuation, Feu duties, Sasine, Process, Security, Property Colonel Andrew Bruce, pursuer, led proof by James Ferrier, writer to the signet, against defender Harry Davidson to the effect that the proof should proceed as agreed by both parties and commissioners. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Bushby 1796 Entail, Retour, Freeholder, Possession, Sasine, Teinds John Bushby petitioned to have James Gordon’s name removed from the freeholder roll for Kirkcudbright Stewartry, challenging the validity of Gordon’s land title on grounds of discrepancies and partial entailment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Campbell v. Stuart 1794 Sasine, Libel, Teinds, Reversion, Prescription, Arrestment Andrew Stuart petitioned against an interlocutor of Lord Frederick Campbell that assoilzied Campbell from the counter-action raised by Stuart. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Carnegy v. Gardyne 1796 Sasine, Charter, Register, Freeholder, Infeftment, Disposition James Lindsay Carnegy petitioned to overturn the enrolment of Charles Gardyne as a freeholder at the Michaelmas head-court for Forfar, contending that the sasine of 1789 underlying Gardyne's claim proceeded upon an exhausted precept and that the claim failed to specify the register in which the sasine was recorded as required by statute. Gardyne answered that his claim satisfied the statute of the 16th of the late King and that the omission of the register specification was immaterial. Carnegy replied insisting upon the necessity of specifying the register, while Gardyne reiterated that his claim met all statutory requirements without such specification and had been properly accepted.
Col. Andrew Bruce v. Freeholders of Stirlingshire 1790 Valuation, Disposition, Sasine, Teinds, Commissioners of Supply, Feu duties Colonel Andrew Bruce younger of Stenhouse pursued the Freeholders of Stirlingshire, represented by Harry Davidson, Writer to the Signet, to compel his enrolment as a freeholder after they rejected his claim based on the valuation of his lands in Slamanan. The dispute turned on whether the valuation-book entries established his qualification and the relative authority of such records versus cess books. Davidson answered that the valuation evidence was unsatisfactory and required re-establishment before the commissioners of supply, while Bruce condescended upon his title and led proof at John's Coffee-house despite Davidson's absence.
Cunningham v. Veitch 1791 Adjudication, Property, Prescription, Possession, Sasine, Teinds The Merchants in Edinburgh, defenders, answered a petition by James Cunningham, pursuer, asserting that Covenant Close was their private property and not a common passage, citing historical deeds and a former gate. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Cunynghame v. Watson 1788 Jurisdiction, Freeholder, Retour, Charter, Sasine, Tax Sir William Augustus Cunynghame petitioned the Court to overturn the freeholders' interlocutor admitting Charles Watson as a freeholder, challenging whether the heritable bailie office and lands qualified Watson for that status. David Williamson answered for the defender, responding to Cunynghame's objections regarding the extent of the office and lands.
Davidson v. Hill 1802 Retour, Charter, Statute, Election contest, Freeholder, Sasine At a meeting of the freeholders of Stirlingshire, Robert Hill claimed to be enrolled upon the lands of Western Glenboig. He produced two extracts of retours which he claimed proved his title. Harry Davidson, one of the freeholders, objected to Hill's enrollment, arguing that Hill’s retours were insufficient. The Court found that the 16th Act of George II required an old extent of lands to be established by a retour, but that this could be done by one or more retours, and that, accordingly, a freeholder who produced two separate retours of two parcels of land had a right to be enrolled (Morison's Decisions of the Court of Session).
Dick v. Drysdale 1800 Tailzie, Liferent, Lease, Sasine, Tack, Interlocutor Sir Alexander held Prestonfield and Corstorphine under several strict entails dating to 1720, one of which prevented any heir from setting tacks for more than one lifetime. Sir Alexander's father, Sir William, set a tack in Drysdale that John Dick, as tutor to his nephew, sought to have voided. An Act of Parliament allowed certain types of tacks in contravention of entail clauses, but Dick maintained that the statute did not apply in this case.
Douglas v. Carnegie 1782 Rent, Freeholder, Proof, Sasine, Infeftment, Oath George Carnegie of Pittarrow submitted answers to the petition and complaint of William Douglas of Bridgetown and Robert Graham of Fintray, Esquires, responding to their objections to his freeholder inrolment. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Edmonstone v. Morehead 1790 Freeholder, Disposition, Teinds, Charter, Sasine, Assignation George Edmonstone, a minister, petitioned the Court to overturn the Stirlingshire freeholders' refusal to admit him to the electoral roll, while William Morehead of Herbertshire defended the decision by challenging Edmonstone's qualification. Edmonstone submitted replies and duplies addressing objections to his qualification, and his agent William Craig filed answers to Morehead's condescendence. The pleadings repeatedly referenced parallel litigation involving Edmonstone's brother Charles Edmonstone and another freeholder, Mr. Cheape.
George Dempster and Others v. Charles Lyel, Jr. 1790 Freeholder, Valuation, Sasine, Tack, Infeftment, Decreet-Arbitral George Dempster and others pursued Charles Lyell, Jr., asking the Court to declare that the freeholders of Forfar had wrongly enrolled Lyell as a freeholder. Lyell answered, defending the validity of his enrollment, and the pursuers replied to his answers.
Grant v. Duff 1773 Adjudication, Freeholder, Succession, Valuation, Sasine, Thirlage Alexander Grant, Esq., younger of Dalvey, as pursuer, petitioned the Court to permit his enrollment as a freeholder of Elgin on the grounds of his proven valuation of lands and fishings, with Duff as defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Greenock Rope-Work Company v Donald, Donald, and Company 1772 Partnership, Dissolution, Debt, Company, Sasine, Compensation The Greenock Ropework Company was a partnership formed to manufacture rope and sail-duck. Two partners, William Donald and Henry White (alternatively spelled Whyte), served as managers of the partnership. The partnership decided that only one manager was necessary, so it appointed Henry White as the sole manager of the partnership. This action offended William Donald as well as William's brother, James Donald, another partner of Greenock Ropework Company. With a strained relationship with two of its partners, William and James Donald proposed that the Company should be dissolved, which it did. The parties disputed the proper method of dissolution. To balance the books prior to dissolution, the partnership sought to collect a debt owed by James and Robert Donalds and Company (named as suspenders), the same James Donald who was a partner of the Greenock Rope partnership. Because the rope-work company furnished some goods to that company. James and Robert Donalds and Company sought to suspend the debt on the grounds that James Donald, as partner of the Greenock Ropework Company, was actually owed money in excess of the debt claimed by the partnership.
Henry v. Russell 1794 Succession, Entail, Disposition, Sasine, Tailzie, Teinds
Hepburn and Massow v. Duff and Davidson 1793 Prescription, Tack, Aliment, Thirlage, tenant, Sasine Robert William Duff and his tenant John Donaldson, defenders in the action by Hepburn and Massow, petitioned against Lord Monboddo's interlocutors. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
J. J. Hope Vere v. Right Hon. Charles Hope and Others 1822 Succession, Entail, Tailzie, Prescription, Disposition, Sasine James Joseph Hope Vere pursued an action of declarator against the Right Honourable Charles Hope and the other Heirs of Entail of Craigiehall regarding the succession to the estate and the effect of the tailzie of 1708. The pursuer contended that the lands were held free of entail fetters, while the defenders maintained that the 1733 marriage contract had not altered the destination of the original entail and asserted that Hope Vere was barred from reduction by contravention, forfeiture, prescription, and the tailzie's resolutive clause. Between 1823 and 1830 the parties exchanged successive defences, informations, and revised cases disputing the construction of the entail and the validity of the subsequent titles.
James Cheap v. Sir David Carnegie 1788 Debt, Aliment, Ranking of Creditors, Sasine, Teinds, Public Burden Sir David Carnegie, Baronet, defender, submitted answers to the petition of James Cheap, Esquire, pursuer, responding to Cheap's argument that public burdens should be proportioned equally by rental value. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
James Cheap v. William Morehead [Copy 1] 1790 Liferent, Sasine, Disposition, Sale, Valuation, Election Digitization and Description in Progress.
Additional documents in this case can be found in the duplicate case record in UVALL Box 16 and in UVALL Box 22 - Vol. 03.
James Cheap v. William Morehead [Copy 3] 1790 Liferent, Disposition, Valuation, Sasine, Infeftment, Feu duties Documents available. Full description in progress. Related documents to this case are located in UVALL Box 16 and UVALL Box 22 - Vol. 02.
James Scott v. John Bruce-Stewart 1776 Positive Prescription, Wadset, Female Succession, Reversion, Prescription, Sasine This case concerns a property dispute over a number of landholdings throughout Shetland, "within the parishes of Dunrosnes, Burray, Tingwall, Aithsting, Walls, Detline, Northmaven, Yell, Fetkor, Bressa, and Lerwick." The cause dated back to the late 17th century, when Sinclair of Scalloway granted wadsets to Stewart of Bigtown over the lands of "Blosta, Aithsetter, and Flathabister, and certain other lands" as well as "Houland, Reafirth, Sellafirth, Woodwick, and Gravone." The wadset was never redeemed and the lands passed to Clementina Stewart, who conveyed them to her husband, John Bruce of Symbister. Around the same time the two co-heirs of Scalloway, Philadelphia Scott and Katherine Sinclair, conveyed this property to Sinclair's husband, James Scott. Scott, now of Scalloway, then brought a process of reduction and declarator, demanding that Bruce-Stewart cede the wadset-lands, or at least return them after receiving the wadset fee. Bruce-Stewart produced various documents that he argued proved the positive prescription, namely a 1706 disposition of these lands by Stewart of Bigtown in favor of his heir. In July 1776, Lord Kennet assoilzied (absolved) Bruce-Stewart from the reduction, and Scott petitioned the Court for review. Scott argued that the right of reversion was heritable and perpetual, and not subject to the positive prescription. Furthermore, he argued that as a result of various technicalities, the disposition upon which the defender made his claim of the positive prescription was null and void. The Court found in favor of Scott at first, but later overturned their previous interlocutor, determining that Bruce-Stewart had produced sufficient evidence to exclude.
John Adair v. Robina and Jean Adairs 1786 Succession, Exhibition Ad Deliberandum, Witness, Debt, Sasine, Bonds John Adair, merchant in Dublin, petitioned the Court to overturn Lord Swinton's interlocutor dismissing his action for exhibition ad deliberandum against Robina and Jean Adairs. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
John Murray v. James Scott 1794 Feu duties, Teinds, Interlocutor, Feu, Sasine, Assignation John Murray petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against James Scott. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
John Smith v. Marion Wilson, and Others 1791 Succession, Aliment, Heirship Moveables, Heritor, Sasine, Recompence John Smith petitioned the Court of Session to alter an interlocutor pronounced by the Lord Justice Clerk regarding a garden at Muirend. Marion Wilson, wife of Robert Mann, and others answered, asserting that the garden was not a præcipuum and thus not entitled to exclusive claim by the eldest sister. The litigation turned on whether the property constituted a præcipuum subject to the eldest sister's exclusive right.
Knox v. Marshall 1765 Aliment, Succession, Creditor, Debt, Liferent, Sasine John Knox of Cartmore petitioned the Court to alter an interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary that had found him entitled to mails and duties. Jasper Marshal answered, contesting Knox’s arguments regarding a heritable bond and its discharge.
Lachlan Maclean v. Elizabeth Maclean 1772 Debt, Aliment, Succession, Property, Poinding, Sasine Lachlan MacLean, pursuer, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against Elizabeth Maclean, defender. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Lord Frederick Campbell, Lord Clerk-Register of Scotland v. Andrew-Stuart, Keeper of the General and Particular Register of Sasines at Edinburgh 1792 Register, Teinds, Prescription, Sasine, Reversion, Statute Lord Frederick Campbell, Lord Clerk-Register of Scotland, sued Andrew Stuart, Keeper of the General and Particular Register of Sasines, to recover authority over the sasine registers. Stuart, together with John Davidson and Andrew Steele, had claimed that a Crown commission conferred upon them lawful authority over the general Register of Seisins and custody of the particular register books. Campbell challenged the validity of that commission and asserted his own statutory authority under the 1617 Act, demanding surrender of the unmarked books.
Luke v. Anderson 1765 Servitude, Disposition, Debt, Adjudication, Succession, Sasine Mrs Anne Luke and James Brisben, carpenter in London, pursued John Anderson and Patrick Robertson, merchants in Glasgow, for payment of the contract price. The pursuers argued that the defenders possessed no valid defence for refusing to pay, while the defenders maintained that the contract of sale had vested them with absolute property free of servitude.
Maclean v. Maclean 1771 Debt, Creditor, Aliment, Succession, Bill of Exchange, Sasine Archibald Maclean had won a judgement against John Maclean for the payment of debts arising from the sale of some merchant goods and a cow. John claimed that he was liable for the merchant goods, but challenged the bill for the cow charges. He alleged that this debt was assigned to some other people by selling the cow.
Mathie v. McIntyre 1789 Lease, Sasine, Trustees, Tack, Interlocutor, Infeftment The pursuer John Mathie petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor in his action against the defender McIntyre. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
McHarg v. Dunn 1771 Debt, Estate, Bill of Exchange, Interest, Improbation, Sasine Pursuer Agnes McHarg sought to collect from defender William Dunn on a bill payable to her late husband, Alexander McCredie. Dunn challenged the authenticity of the bill, relevant dates, and the rate of interest. McHarg maintained the bill was authentic and properly dated from 1748. McHarg also cast doubt on Dunn's testimony and allegations.
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.
Munro v. Robertson 1778 Adjudication, Arrestment, Sequestration, Sasine, Interlocutor, Infeftment Pursuer George Munro petitioned the Court, in the action against defender Robertson, for permission to use his inhibitions on three debts to draw payment from the parcel of lands where infeftment followed, rather than his arrestments. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Patrick Heron v. Adam Menzies 1767 Landlord and tenant, Debt, Rent, Aliment, Sasine, Tack Pursuer Patrick Heron of Heron sought to have letters of horning directed against defender Adam Menzies of Troloss for unpaid rent.
Proctor v. Carnegy 1796 Disposition, Sasine, Charter, Infeftment, Assignation, Seisin Patrick Proctor pursued an action against Sir David Carnegie to establish the validity of a sasine, maintaining that the seisin was legally complete without a commission from Lord Strathmore and that the freeholders and Court had improperly rejected his inrolment. Carnegie defended by contending that the commission was an essential part of the title which Proctor had failed to produce to the freeholders, rendering the seisin null. The parties exchanged informations and memorials debating the necessity of the commission and the legal effect of the sasine.
Representatives of Laurie v. Bell 1797 Disposition, Succession, Sasine, Tack, Aliment, Heir The Representatives of Laurie, as suspender and holder of a four-fifths interest, sought suspension of a sale against Bell on the ground of a title defect affecting the share of the pupil Gilbert Laurie Finlay, son of the deceased Jean Laurie. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
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 Alexander v. Charles Dalrymple 1774 Title Dispute, Succession, Sasine, Heir, Infeftment, Feu duties Based on titles to the lands of Boghall and Dalmelling, Robert Alexander of Blackhouse sought to be enrolled as a freeholder in the county of Ayr. Charles Dalrymple of Orangefield objected to Alexander's enrollment on the ground that Dalrymple's family held prior titles to the claimed lands. The Court of Freeholders dismissed Alexander's claim, and he appealed to the Court of Session.
Robert Coldstream v. William Duncan of Stonnywind and Katherine Thomson 1783 Debt, Aliment, Stipend, Proof, Sasine, Tack Robert Coldstream pursued William Duncan of Stonnywind and Katherine Thomson in a dispute over the thirlage of the lands of Stonywind to the Parkmill for malt grinding and multure payment, with proof taken by John Graham of Greigston on 10 January 1783. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Robert Home-Gordon v. Hugh Rose 1790 Freehold Qualification, Sasine, Wadset, Freeholder, Bill of Exchange, Possession Robert Home-Gordon of Embo and his co-pursuers petitioned the Court to expunge Hugh Rose of Aitnoch from the roll of freeholders of Sutherland, alleging that Rose's qualification was nominal and fictitious. Rose answered the petition and subsequent condescendence, defending his wadset qualification and land possession against the pursuers' allegations of insufficient freehold status. The cause proceeded through replies and further answers regarding the validity of Rose's entitlement to remain on the freeholders' roll.
Robson v. Robson 1793 Succession, Disposition, Sasine, Aliment, Heir, Adjudication George Robson petitioned the Court to overturn Lord Ankerville's interlocutor concerning their father's settlement, which had favored George over his elder brother James. James Robson answered, asserting that the father had exercised a reserved power to alter the settlement by granting an acre in Jedburgh to James as heir at law. George replied, contending that James was not entitled to the acre because the term "heir" in the settlement referred to the legal heir rather than the heir of investiture.

Documents discussing this subject (showing 100 of 905)