Subject_1 INHIBITION.
Date: Creditors of Sir Alexander Hope of Kerse, Competing
2 February 1750
Case No.No. 12.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The Lords gave the like judgment as they did in the 1747, in the case of Campbell of Whitehaugh,* that an inhibition does not affect proportionally all posterior contractions, but only such as are least preferable, though these postponed posterior contractions were not real by infeftment, and so contracted on the faith of the records, but were only personal debts on which adjudications afterwards followed, though the postponed creditors alleged that that decision was made on account of the faith of the records;—in respect of the answer, that the principle established by that decision was, that inhibitions do not totally void all subsequent transactions, but only such as are to the prejudice, and only in so far as they are so, and can therefore only claim a preference, and have no prejudice where there is not sufficient to pay both. Vide inter eosdem voce Ranking and Sale. (See Dict. No. 53. p. 6984.)
Dict. No. 48. p. 6974.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting