If probative of its Onerous Cause against Creditors and Donatars of Escheat.
Riddoch v. Younger
Date: 9 March 1639 Case No. No 441.
A right granted by a bankrupt to his son in familia, reduced as gratuitous, tho' it bore to be for sums of money and onerous causes, and the defender offered his oath in supplement.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
One Riddoch reducing some dispositions made by one Younger to his son Younger, upon the reason of the act of dyvoury, as done by a bankrupt to his own son without just and true onerous causes in defraud of the pursuer, a true and just creditor; and the defender opponing his right, which bore to be made “for sums of money and onerous causes;” against which positive clause the pursuer can never be heard to allege the same to be made without payment of any sums of money, except that he should prove the same by the oath of the receiver; and the pursuer replying, That in this case the presumptions were so manifest for him, and for the truth of his reason, that it laid a necessity upon the defender to prove and show that he had paid sums for this right made to him, seeing it is made by the father to the son, who was a young man unmarried, remaining in house with his father, and who cannot condescend upon any probable way, by the which he might have acquired means or monies to have acquired this right, neither can he condescend upon any person who was debtor to him in monies; and in the dispositions, the father's and mother's liferents are reserved, which all discovers a manifest fraud. The Lords repelled the allegeance, except the defender should qualify and prove some onerous lawful cause for the which this disposition was made, otherwise than by the confession contained in the writ or by his own oath, neither whereof the Lords found sufficient in this case, except that beside the same the defender might make it appear that he had acquired it for true sums debursed by him, and show to whom the sums were paid, and where and by what means he had acquired these sums.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 251. Durie, p. 882.
*** A similar decision was pronounced, 12th February 1670, Napier against Gordon, No 95. p. 3755. voce Execution.
