If you found BAILII useful today, could you please make a contribution?
Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Tacit relocation not presumed where the tenant was not in the natural possession.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Earl of Morton obtained inhibition upon William Scot, burgess of Edinburgh, charging him to desist and cease from the teinds of K. and kirk-lands of the same, as presently having most right to the same. It was answered by Scot, That he had the kirk-lands in tack, and for payment of a sum pro indiviso, and he not being warned from the lands, and occupying them ex tacita relocatione, ought not to desist and cease except he had been warned. It was answered, That he could not allege tacitam relocationem, nor it was not relevant except he would allege possession. The which allegeance was found relevant by the Lords, and appeared to be conform to the warning of the common law, in lege, Qui ad certum, D. Locati, Nam verba legis sunt, cum dominus patitur colonum in fundo esse, quod pre-suppositur possidere. Nonnulli doctorum et advocatus doctissimus in contraria fuerunt opinione.