[1676] Mor 6959
Subject_1 INHIBITION.
Subject_2 SECT. I. Nature, Stile, and Effect of an Inhibition.
Date: Finlay
v.
Little
7 July 1676
Case No.No 26.
An inhibition which designed the person inhibited “Merchant Burgess of Edinburgh,' sustained, tho' the execution bore only that a copy was left at his dwelling house “within written.”
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Quintin Finlay pursues reduction ex capite inhibitionis against Little of Libberton, who alleged absolvitor, because the inhibition is null, as being executed at the house of the person inhibited, not designing where the dwelling-house was. It was answered, That the executions bear “The within designed John Lindsay's dwelling-house,” who is designed within “merchant burgess of Edinburgh.” It was replied, non relevat, seeing that does not import that he was indweller in Edinburgh, for many merchants, burgesses of Edinburgh, are not residenters. It was duplied, præsumitur residens, unless another domicile were condescended upon and offered to be proved.
The Lords sustained the inhibition, unless another domicile were offered to be condescended upon and proved.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting