Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR JOHN LAUDER OF FOUNTAINHALL.
Thomas Allan v. The Creditors of Hugh Nielson, Apothecary
Date: 29 January 1695
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Lords found Bailie Grahame's back-bond was of the nature of a reversion, the subject being anent heritable rights; yet, that neither it, nor the assignation thereto, needed to be registrate, in regard the Act of Parliament 1617 only requires registration where seasine has followed on the right under reversion.
And an inhibition being obtruded against the [disposition,] and both being of one date, the question was, Which of them was presumed to be the first? Several of the Lords inclined, that such an execution of inhibition could not reduce that disposition, seeing it was not usual to insert hours, either in inhibitions or dispositions; though some thought the presumption should lie in favours of the legal diligence, and against the voluntary right, But it was not decided.
