Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR DAVID DALRYMPLE, LORD HAILES.
Subject_2 SEQUESTRATION.
Subject_3 Sequestration of Rents awarded upon the application of the Trustees of the proprietor of the estate, deceased, though opposed by the Heir, who had brought a reduction of the trust-deed.

Earl of Hyndford, and Others,
v.
David Dickson of Kilbucko

Date: 1 August 1769

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

[Faculty Collection, V. 14; Dictionary, 14, 347.]

Gardenston. It is not competent for the trustees to obtain a sequestration when they may act if they think fit. Here they may act, but they find they have a troublesome party; and, so, to relieve themselves from trouble, they would put the estate into the hands of the Court.

Justice-Clerk. Dickson obstructs the management, and challenges the trust-right. There is a competition actually depending in Court. A sequestration is never refused, when asked by the person apparently in the right of the subject.

Pitfour. Lord Gardenston's opinion does not apply; for here there is a proper competition as to possession.

Auchinleck. If Dickson sought sequestration, and the others opposed it, there might be difficulty.

Elliock. The trustees have the right; but the apparent heir is actually in possession.

Stonefield. In the Douglas cause, sequestration was not allowed. A sequestration is an odious thing; it is a license to mismanage an estate.

Monboddo. It is nothing that the apparent heir has got into possession. The trustees must age to turn him out again.

On the 1st August, “The Lords sequestrated.”

Act. J. M'Claurin. Alt. Ipse.

Diss. Gardenston, Strichen, Stonefield, Monboddo.