Any colourable title of intromission found to elide the passive title.
Drummond v. Menzies
Date: 16 December 1674 Case No. No 182.
Found in conformity with Lady Spencerfield against Hamilton, supra.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the process at the instance of George Drummond, for payment of a sum due by Alexander Menzies of Rotwell, as intromitter with the debtor's goods, it was found, (as in diverse cases before) That the pretence, that the defunct was rebel, and his escheat gifted, doth not purge vitious intromission, unless it be alleged, that the defunct's escheat was gifted and declared before intenting of the cause, or that the defender did intromit, either by virtue of a gift to himself, or by warrant and right from the donatar for the defender's intromission, though the gift was not declared before the intenting of the cause; in respect if there was a gift declared before the intenting of the cause, the defender is in the same case as if there were an executor confirmed before the intenting of the cause; and if he had either the gift himself, or a right from the donatar before he did intromit, his possession ab initio being by virtue of a title, though not perfected, cannot be said to be vitious; and quivis titulus etiam cloratus, purges the vitiousness of the intromission.
Reporter, Strathurd.Clerk, Gibson.
Fol. Dic. v. 2. p. 43. Dirleton, No 205. p. 92.
