[1774] Hailes 607
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR DAVID DALRYMPLE, LORD HAILES.
Subject_2 CESSIO BONORUM.
Date: Armstrong
v.
His Creditors
24 December 1774 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In this case the pursuer of the cessio bonorum made oath that he had not cancelled any writings, but he omitted to say that he had not put any writings away. The Lords found that the oath was incomplete, and refused to set him at liberty, although there was no opposition made by the creditors. It was said that the modern practice of paying creditors by a cessio ought not to be favoured beyond the letter of the law; and that a man, making such an oath, might put away writings, and so defraud his creditors: That if he had sworn that he had not put away, it might be concluded that he had not cancelled any writings; but not vice versa.
For Petitioner, D. Armstrong.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting