A tacksman of teinds found to have no title to pursue intromitters after his tack was expired, and that he had not the benefit of tacit relocation.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Laird of Lag being tacksman of the teinds of the parish of Lynton, pursues against some of the parishioners an action of wrongous intromission with the teinds of the crop 1619, and spuilzie of divers other years thereafter. It was alleged for the defenders, that the action could not be sustained at his instance for the crop 1619, because he had no tack standing of that year; and so he wanting a title, which might give him right to that year's teinds, he could not pursue the defenders for their intromission therewith. It was replied, That albeit he had no present tack standing that year, yet seeing he was kindly tacksman many years before, by virtue whereof he was possessor of the teinds, and had received duties thereof from the same defender, albeit his tack was expired a year or two, preceding this year controverted, yet he bruiking per tacitam relocationem; and having renewed his tack again, in anno 1620 and having paid his old tack-duty for that same year controverted to the titular, who opponed not against his right, neither troubled the defenders for that year's teinds acclaimed either by inhibition or any other deed, which might distress the excipient, they therefore could not quarrel the pursuer's right, nor interrupt his possession and tacit relocation, having no right in his own person, which could purge his intromission, or liberate him of the said teinds that year libelled. The Lords found the exception relevant, and found that the pursuer could not have action for the teinds of that year, whereof there was no tack nor title standing then in his own person; and that the renovation of his tack thereafter, no tacit relocation of the preceding teind intervening betwixt the expiring of the old tack, and acquiring of the new, and paying to the titular the old tack-duty of that year questioned, could not be a sufficient title to sustain the pursuer's action against the defenders.
Act, Belches & Cunninghame.Alt, Lawtie.clerk, Gibson.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 426. Durie, p. 6.
