Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION. reported by ALEXANDER TAIT, CLERK OF SESSION, one of the reporters for the faculty.
Subject_2 REPARATION

Patrick Ritchie
v.
Andrew Pitcairn

Date: 18 December 1776

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

Andrew Pitcairn, writer in Dundee, had been intrusted by Patrick Ritchie, baker there, in purchasing a house from Maclean, mariner in Dundee, for whom Pitcairn was also doer. Ritchie alleged, that he had made the purchase upon the faith of an opinion given him by Pitcairn, that he might make the purchase safely; whereas, now, it appeared that he could not and did not make the purchase safely, on account of an heritable debt due to Jean Reid, which Pitcairn not only knew of, but had wrote out an heritable bond for the same.

Pitcairn, on the other hand, set forth, that, at the time he gave his opinion, he told Ritchie of the heritable bond to Reid, and indeed that the same was known to half the town of Dundee; but, that he was of opinion that the other part of Maclean's subjects remaining unsold were more than sufficient to pay said incumbrance: That they were bought by Ritchie himself since that time, and the price applied for payment of Reid's debt; but that, by the fall of houses in Dundee since the year 1772, there would be a shortcoming. It was further alleged, that part of the price of the first purchase made by Ritchie, had been made to Pitcairn in order to apply it in part payment of the debt to Reid. But it was answered, that although it was true that Pitcairn had received part of said price, but not for the purposes aforesaid, yet it was equally true that he had applied it according to Maclean's directions, and had cleared with him for it.

In an action of damages at Ritchie's instance against Pitcairn, before Lord Kennet, his Lordship, 5th December 1775, “ordained the pursuer to give in a condescendence of facts he alleges and offers to prove, in order to infer damages.”

Which being given in with answers, he sustained the defences and assoilyied, 5th March 1776.

Afterwards, upon a reference to oath, Pitcairn was examined; and, upon advising thereof, the Ordinary found that the oath did not prove the points referred to it, and therefore adhered. And this day, upon advising bill and answers, the Lords adhered.