How and to whom competent to insist upon this Passive Title.
Loch v. Menzies
Date: 5 December 1729 Case No. No 189.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Sir William Menzies granted a bond of aliment to his daughter, upon death-bed, for payment of which process was raised against Sir William's representative, upon the passive title of vitious intromission. The defence was, That though this obligation was conceived per modum actus inter vivos, yet being granted upon death-bed, and not declared till after death, it was donatio mortis causa, which the granter did not design to be binding upon him if he reconvalesced; and therefore, she had not the benefit of the passive title of vitious intromission, which was introduced in favour only of proper creditors of the defunct, such who could have compelled him by way of process to implement; and it was added, that a donatio mortis causa, in whatever terms conceived, is more properly a legacy than an obligation. The Lords found this bond to be a debt relevant to subject the defender as vitious intromitter. See Appendix.
