Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION. Collected By JAMES BURNETT, LORD MONOBODDO.
Subject_2 COMPLAINT FROM STIRLINGSHIRE.
Date: William Wemyss
v.
Major Cunningham
15 February 1758 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
[Fac. Coll. II, No. 102.]
In this case the Lords found, that, since the statute of the 20th of the King, taking away escheats, horning is not a diligence that can affect lands ; and therefore, that a disposition made by a debtor of an heritable subject, in favour of one creditor, after horning was executed against him, and he denounced at the instance of another creditor, was not reducible upon the Act 1621. In finding so, they found that so much of the statute 1621 was virtually repealed by the statute of the 20th of the King.
In this case the Court was of opinion that an arrestment upon an unregistered bond might compete with an arrestment upon a horning, if, at the time of the competition, the bond was registered ; for they considered an arrestment upon an unregistered bond as equivalent to an arrestment upon a dependance, upon which there cannot be execution by forthcoming till there be a decree recovered; because forthcoming is an executorial which cannot be without either decree or a registered bond.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting