No exception will be sustained unless proponed at Litiscontestation.
Fyfe v. Daw in Perth
Date: 6 November 1667 Case No. No 47.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A burgess in Perth having put his son with a neighbour to be his apprentice, and the boy having diverted from his service, the father was pursued for damage and interest sustained by the master, who did refer to the father's oath his absence and diverting. In which process, the father having declared with a quality, That the master had beaten and put away his son,
The Lords found, The quality being super facto alieno did resolve in an exception, which he should have proponed, and cannot be proved by his own oath; and yet though the process was a suspension, wherein there had been litiscontestation, as said is, the Lords did give a term to prove the said quality. See Suspension.
