Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
One having granted a disposition of some goods, without an onerous cause, containing warrandice from fact and deed, and dispensation with the not-delivery; and thereafter disponed some of the same goods to another; in a competition, it was alleged for the receiver of the first disposition, That the disponer could not take away his jus quæsitum thereby.
Answered: The first disposition was never delivered; and the clause dispensing with the not-delivery, could not hinder the disponer to alter or innovate at his pleasure, though there was no such reserved faculty; all the use of a dispensing clause being only to hinder heirs or executors to quarrel the deed for want of delivery, which the disponer altered not before his death.
The Lords preferred the second disposition, in respect of the answer.
