Legal Diligence Executed at a Wrong Place. - Head Court Held at a Wrong Place.
Innes v. Innes
Date: 8 December 1622 Case No. No 13.
The place where a baron's courts were held, was different from that mentioned in a vassal's infeftment. The vassal, notwithstanding, was unlawed for non-appearance at the court which custom had sanctioned.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
One Innes, vassal to the Bishop of Murray, being holden by the express clause of his infeftment, to compear in the Bishop's court to be holden at the place of Spynie, and being unlawed by Alexander Innes of Cotts, the Bishop's Bailie, for not compearance in his courts holden at another place than the place designed by his charter or infeftment; which being suspended on this reason, that he ought to compear in no other place than the place designed by his evident;——The Lords sustained the act unlawing him for being absent from that other place where the courts were holden, notwithstanding of the place appointed by the infeftment; because it was alleged by the Bailie, that the suspender and his predecessors expressly, as also the rest of the Bishop's vassals, hath been in the use these 30 years bypast, to come to that other place at which only the Bishop's courts were kept, and not to the place designed in the infeftment; which allegeance of the suspender, and his predecessor's use of coming to that other place, being their own deed, the Lords found relevant to eleid the reason founded upon the infeftment, and place therein mentioned, seeing the suspender could not qualify nor allege any prejudice which he could sustain by coming to that place where the courts were in use to be holden, and by that change from the place of his infeftment.
