What subjects fall sub communione bonorum et debitorum.
Subject_3 SECT. V.
Effect of rendering the Wife's Heritable Subjects Moveable.
Cockburn v. Burn
Date: 21 February 1679 Case No. No 32.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A husband pursued for exhibition and delivery of a bond lent out by his umquhile spouse, which therefore must be presumed to be out of his means Against delivery it was pleaded by an assignee from the wife, That the bond came in place of an heritable bond due to the wife before her marriage, which she had uplifted.——The Lords found it relevant that the wife had an heritable bond before her marriage; and found, that her uplifting thereof being again re-employed heritably, did not make it fall to the husband as moveable.
Fol. Dic. v. 1. p. 386. Stair.*** Fountainhall reports the same case:
The Lords found, where wives uplift sums heritable quoad maritum, and reemploy them again upon another heritable security, the husband had no interest therein, though he got no tocher; as also they found, (which was never decided before,) that in the wife's deeds of administration of her own proper goods, not falling under communion, she needed not her husband's consent, without prejudice of his right to the annualrents jure mariti. This last was not debated.
Fountainhall, MS.
*** See Stairs report of this case, No 29. p. 5993.
