Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 FORFEITURE.

Claim on the Estate of Kinloch

1751, Jan. 10.
Case No. No. 16.

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

On this estate we had three claims, all of them founded on an entail made by the for feiting person's grandfather, on which there had been charters and sasines, but never recorded in the register of tailzies, though dated only in 1686;—one claim for James Kinloch his eldest son, as next heir of tailzie; another by his brother, in case James's had been dismissed, because he was a son of the forfeiting person, and that the forfeiting per son had incurred an irritancy by alienating part of the estate, and an heir contravening forfeited for himself and all his descendants; and a third for David Kinloch Kilrie, nephew to Sir David Kinloch, maker of the tailzie, and heir in remainder, (to speak in English style) for that both the forfeiting person and his father had incurred irritancies. We dismissed the first claim, in respect that the tailzie was not recorded. The second claim was not insisted in, and was dismissed for that reason;—and the third was dismissed both because the tailzie was not recorded, and the irritancy was not declared before the forfeiture.