Subject_1 COMPENSATION - RETENTION. Subject_2 SECT. VIII.
Effect Relative to Arresters.
Competition of Appin's Creditors
Date: 10 December 1760 Case No. No 72.
A depositary was not permitted to retain goods, for a debt due to himself, in opposition to an arrestment.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A debtor perceiving his affairs to be in disorder, put the keys of his house in Edinburgh, with an inventory of his furniture and plate, into the hands of a friend, who at the same time was creditor to him in L. 131 Sterling; and to escape from diligence left the country. The depositary put the goods into another man's house, in whose hands one of the creditors immediately laid an arrestment. Another having arrested in the hands of the depositary, he raised a multiplepoinding, pleading, That the goods were pledged in his hands, in security of a debt owing to himself, or at least that he had a right of retention, until he should operate his own payment. In proof of this, he produced a letter from the debtor, acknowledging that the goods were left in his hands in security of a debt he owed him.—Answered, The letter was obtained ex post facto, after notour bankruptcy; and there is no evidence of an actual impignoration of the goods.—The Lords preferred the arrester. See The particulars, No 79. p. 749.
