Kirk lands having been annexed to the Crown by act 1633, a Lord of Erection was found not entitled to insist as superior, in an action of reduction and improbation, against vassals, even with concourse of the King's Advocate.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Laird of Preston pursues reduction and improbation against Nathaniel Ebred of all his rights of certain lands. The defender alleged absolvitor, because the lands in question are Abbay lands, erected in a temporal holding in favour of Preston; and therefore, by the act 10th Parliament 1633, all such lands are annexed to the Crown, and the feu-duties are only found due to the Lords of Erection ay and while they be redeemed, which is repeated in the 30th act of Parliament 1661, and therefore the pursuer not being superior, but the King, he has no interest to improve or reduce. The pursuer answered, That he opponed his infeftment of the lands holden of the King with the King's advocate's concourse. The defender answered, That the advocate's concourse was but ex stilo curiæ, and he could make no concourse sufficient for any improbation and reduction without the King's special order.
The Lords found the defence relevant, and assoilzied. At which time it was remembered, that Sir Thomas Hope insisting in an improbation of his good-son, the same was not sustained, because it wanted the King's express order.
