Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 HEIR CUM BENEFICIO.

Menzies
v.
Dickson

1742, Nov. 12.
Case No. No. 4.

Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

One infeft by precept of clare constat in the property, purchased the superiority, and got a disposition containing procuratory and precept, with two charters of the lands a me and de me, and on the procuratory obtained a charter from the Crown; but never was infeft in the superiority; and bis son possessed on his contract of marriage, wherein the father provided the lands to him; and the grandson served heir-general to the grandfather, and took infeftment on the Crown's charter, but no otherwise infeft himself in the property, nor did he serve heir to his father. This found no consolidation, and that he had only right to the superiority.

1741, Dec. 15.

First find that the property and superiority were not consolidated in the person of either Alexander third or Alexander fifth, and find that the pursuer the heir of Alexander third cannot quarrel the charter by him to his brother John 3tio. A hearing January 8th. Whether the pursuer as heir served to the last Coulterallers though cum beneficio can quarrel any of his deeds, though concerning subjects not in the inventory? and to lay before us at same time the value of the subject; and 28th January 1742 adhered as to the two first points. As to the other point on which the hearing was appointed, they found that the service even cum beneficio bars him from quarrelling the deeds of Alexander fifth. 12th November 1742 The Lords altered, and found him not barred by his service.

(Reference is in the Dictionary erroneously made to the title Superior and Vassal.)