Subject_1 ANNUALRENT. Subject_2 ANNUALRENT due by those who are lucrati, as having had the use of money belonging to others.
Parkhill v. Batchelor
Date: 25 June 1748 Case No. No 90.
Where one has in his hands another person's money, not as a debt, but as that person's property, annualrent is due as the profit of the money.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the question, whether annualrent be due, there is a material difference, whether the money be due as a debt, or if it be due as the pursuer's property in the hands of the defender, Where it is due as a debt, then regularly no annualrent is due upon it sine pacto. But where one has got into his hands another person's money, then annualrent, as the profits of the money, is no less due than the money itself.
For which reason it was, that in this case Charles Batchelor having got 500 merks from John Parkhill's wife, during her marriage with John Parkhill, which the law presumed to have been her husband's money, he was decerned to repeat to Parkhill, not only the 500 merks, but the interest of it from the time he got it. (See Husband and Wife.)
The like was some years ago found, Mr Thomas Rigg contra John Cunningham of Enterkine.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 30. Kilkerran, (Annualrent.) No 3. p. 29.
