Subject_1 COMPENSATION - RETENTION. Subject_2 SECT. XV.
Concursus Debiti et Crediti.
Ross v. Butler
Date: 20 January 1629 Case No. No 111.
The creditor of a rebel, cannot plead compensation against the donatary, to his single escheat, claiming the value of intromissions had after the rebellion.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
N. Ross, donatar to the escheat of David Vauss, pursued Mr George Butler for the farms of the lands of Blawes, 1623, or prices thereof, belonging to the rebel, and intromitted with by the defender.—Alleged, He ought to have retention of the sum of L. 200, addebted to him by the rebel.—Replied, No allowance of any debt of the rebel's to meet the donatar with, but only of that horning whereupon the gift proceeded.——The Lords would not admit that compensation against the donatar; especially, because of the time of the debtor's intromission with the rebel's corns, the said David Vauss was then rebel, and so he intromitted with that which was the King's, and could not allege he had jus retentionis of so much as pertained to the rebel.
