Subject_1 JUS SUPERVENIENS AUCTORI ACCRESCIT SUCCESSORI. Subject_2 SECT. II.
Where the Author is not liable in Warrandice.
Boyd of Pinkhill v. Tenants of Cairsluith
Date: 15 February 1665 Case No. No 11.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Pinkhill, as donatar to the ward of Cairsluith, pursues removing against the tenants, whose master compears, and alleges, That the gift was to the behoof of the minor, his superior; who, as representing his father and godsir, was obliged, in absolute warrandice against wards per expressum.
The Lords considering, whether that could be understood of any other wards, than such as had fallen before the warrandice, or if it could extend to all subsequent wards, of the superior's heir, and so to nonentries, &c. which they thought hard; seeing all holdings were presumed ward, unless the contrary appear, and the superior could not be thought to secure against subsequent wards, unless it were so specially expressed, all wards past and to come; yet seeing it was found formerly that if the superior take such a gift, and be bound in warrandice, that the same should accresce to the vassals, paying their proportional part of the expense, and composition; they found the defence, that this gift was to the behoof of the superior, relevant ad hunc effectum, to restrict it to a proportional part of the expense. See Warrandice.
