[1661] Mor 12220
Subject_1 PROCESS.
Subject_2 SECT. XX. Competent and Omitted.
Date: Gordon of Gight
v.
Abercrombie of Birkbog
12 December 1661
Case No.No 363.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Sir Alexander Abercrombie of Birkbog having obtained decreet of ejection against Sir George Gordon of Gight, for repossessing him in certain lands, and paying the double rent for the violent profits; Gight pursues reduction of the decreet, on these reasons; 1mo, Because there was no law nor practick to make the violent profits of lands, without burgh, to be the double of the rent, which is only competent by custom, in prædiis urbanis; 2do, The ejection was prescribed, not being intented within three years, conform to the act of Parliament; 3tio, Gight's defence of entering, in vacuum possessionem, was only found probable, scripto vel juramento, whereas being facti, it was probable by witnesses.
The Lords repelled the first and second reasons, as competent, and omitted in the decreet; and, as to third, the decreet did bear the allegeance in the decreet, to be Gight's entering into void possession, with consent of party, which consent not being qualified by any palpable fact was not probable by witnesses. See Proof.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting