John Veitch, younger of Dawick, v. Alexander Williamson
Date: 9 December 1664 Case No. No 346.
Found that minority does not interrupt the running of the legal.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
John Veitch pursues Williamson upon the act betwixt debitor and creditor, for paying to him of his proportional part of the mails and duties of apprised lands, as coming in pari passu with the defender, by an apprising within a year of his. The defender alleged absolvitor, because he has right to the first apprising, led before the act of Parliament betwixt debitor and creditor; and therefore he has the benefit of the 21st act of the last session of Parliament, declaring, that where an appriser, for his own security had redeemed a prior apprising, and gotten right thereto before the act betwixt debitor and creditor, the said first apprising should have the same effect it would have had before the act debitor and creditor, and should not come in pari passu. The pursuer answered, That behoved only to be understood, where the second appriser had upon necessity to shun the expiring of the legal redeemed, and gotten right to the first apprising, which could not be said here, because the debitor being minor the legal had and has a long course to run.
The Lords sustained the defence without any such limitation, in respect of the express tenor of the act of Parliament.
