Subject_1 IMPLIED DISCHARGE and RENUNCIATION. Subject_2 SECT. V.
Accepting a Tack, Whether it implies Renunciation of the Property; Whether it implies Renunciation of a former Tack.
Sinclair v. Manderson
Date: 18 December 1565 Case No. No 25.
Taking a short tack prejudges not the tenant of a longer or of a renttal, which he had before, unless they differ in substansialibus.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Anent the action pursued by Sinclair of L, against John Manderson, for removing from certain lands as he that was lawfully warned, it was alleged by the said defender, that he should not remove from the said lands, because he has the said lands in liferent, set to him by the pursuer's father, to whom he is heir. It was alleged by the pursuer, that the said defender should remove from the said lands, because the said defender took of the pursuer, first seven years tack, and thereafter five years tack, and therefore, howbeit, he has liferent, as he alleges he passes from the same, by reason of taking two tacks. It was alleged by the said defender, that the taking of the said tack should not prejudge him in his liferent, because he entered to the said lands by virtue of the said liferent, and has bruiked the same ay sincesyne; and albeit he had taken such tacks as the pursuer alleges, (which he grants not,) he past never from his liferent, but bruiked possession of the said lands by virtue thereof, and not by virtue of the tacks. It was found by the Lords' interlocutor, that a man having liferent of lands, that albeit he tacks thereafter his tack being run out before the liferenter die, that he may bruik the lands by virtue of his liferent, notwithstanding the tacks, they being given from the giver of the liferent, or his heirs; and therefore the Lords repelled the allegeance of the pursuer, and admitted the defender's allegeance.
