Subject_1 IMPLIED DISCHARGE and RENUNCIATION. Subject_2 SECT. XIII.
Effect of Consent.
Stirling v. Her Tenants
Date: 15 December 1630 Case No. No 78.
A wife was provided in an annualrent by her husband, with consent of her father, who was infeft in the lands. Found that though the husband was never infeft, the wife's annuity could not be affected by tacks afterwards let by her father-in-law.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Jean Stirling being provided, by her contract of marriage, to an annualrent out of the lands of Templeland, by her umquhile husband, whereto her umquhile husband's father was a consenter in the contract, after her husband's decease, she pursuing the tenants for poinding of the ground for that annualrent, by value of her sasine following upon that contract, and the tenants defending with tacks, set by the umquhile father of her husband; so that they alleged they could only poind the ground for the duty of the tack, specially seeing the husband, who was the author of her right to the said annualrent, was never infeft, but the father, who set the tacks;——The Lords found, that seeing the father consented to the said contract of marriage, and that the tacks were set after the date of the relict's contract and security, that the same could not stay the poinding of the ground for the whole annualrent, whereof she was not prejudged by the said tack set sincesyne, as said is, albeit her husband was not infeft, in respect of the consent foresaid of the father, before these tacks were set.
Clerk, Scot.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 438. Durie, p. 548.
