Mr Nathaniel Fyfe v. White, Deacon of the Shoemakers in Perth
1683.
March. Case No. No. 64.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
One having, for onerous causes, assigned a sum contained in a bond, and disponed an apprising that had followed thereon, with absolute warrandice, and pursued the receiver for the sum agreed to be given for the disposition and assignation.
Alleged for the defender: That the apprising was not a profitable right, the worth of the lands apprised being exhausted by preferable rights and diligences.
Answered: The warrandice, though absolute, can import no more, save that debitum subest.
Replied: Though absolute warrandice in the transmission of nomina debitorum imports only debitum subesse, yet it operates a full security and responsableness of the debtor, when rights and diligences of lands are disponed.
