[1681] Mor 12522
Subject_1 PROOF.
Subject_2 DIVISION III. Public Instrument, how far Probative.
Subject_3 SECT. III. Instrument of Sasine.
Date: Irving
v.
Corsen
11 February 1681
Case No.No 398.
A sasine of a tenement, within burgh, by a father to his son, for love and favour, bearing registration by the father in a Bailie's hands, was found not to instruct, without a warrant.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Francis Irving pursues reduction and improbation of the rights of some tenements in Dumfries against John Corsen, who having produced a sasine, out of the Town-books, under the present Clerk's hands, bearing, that the defender's father having in implement of a disposition, whereby he disponed these tenements to the defender, and his heirs male, and for love and favour, propriis manibus, resigned them in the Bailies' hands, for new infeftment to the defender his son, and that accordingly the Bailie gave sasine. The pursuer alleged, No respect ought to be had to this sasine, because it is no principal sasine, under the hand of the Town-clerk, notary thereto, but is only a double under the hand of the present Town-clerk, out of the Town's books, which have not registers capable of extracts, but a notary's prothocol, and therefore at least the sasine should have been transumed upon production of the Town's books; 2do, This sasine can import no right, being assertio notarii without warrant or adminicle. It was answered, That the books of burghs-royal are in place of registers of sasines within burghs, and more authentic than a prothocol of a private notary, and it would be a greater inconvenience to bring out books upon all occasions for transuming sasines; neither need such sasines to have adminicles, being within burghs, not given by Bailies in that part, but by the Bailies within burgh, and by the Town-clerk, especially in this case, where it is a sasine given by a father to a son, for love and favour.
The Lords found the sasine not sufficient to instruct the right without a warrant or adminicles, and found that an extract out of the Town's books could not supply a principal sasine upon the attest of the Town-clerk, who was notary thereto, but granted cemmission to compare the sasine produced with the Town's book, and found the report of the commission, bearing, this extract to be conform, sufficient for a principal sasine.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting