Subject_1 SUPERIOR AND VASSAL. Subject_2 SECT. XII.
What Sum payable in Name of Entry-Money?
Branden Baird v. -
Date: 18 July 1633 Case No. No. 60.
Found in conformity with the above.
No defalcation allowed on account of a subsisting life-rent on the estate.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a suspension raised by the superior of charges raised against him, to receive a compriser, wherein the Lords found, That deduction ought to be made to the superior off the first end of the year's duty acclaimed by the superior, for his entry of the compriser, of so much proportionally as that land was affected with any burden which really was thereupon acknowleged, and flowing from the superior's own consent; and because the compriser alleged, That the lands were also affected with a life-rent, in the person of——————, yet living, during whose life-time the comprising could not be effectual to him, and which life-rent also was authorised with the superior's consent, and proceeded from him, therefore he desired some defalcation of the year's duty payable, and acclaimed by the superior, for his entry, which would not be profitable during the life-renter's life-time; the Lords found, That they would grant no defalcation therefore, but declared, that whatever should be modified and decerned to be paid to the superior by the compriser, that the payment thereof should be superseded to the life-renter's decease, and that he should not be subject to pay the same, so long as she lived.
Act. Baird.Clerk, Gibson,
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 409. Durie, p. 686.
