[1776] Mor 6108
Subject_1 HUSBAND and WIFE.
Subject_2 DIVISION X. Deeds betwixt Husband and Wife during marriage.
Subject_3 SECT. II. Whether deeds betwixt Husband and Wife, where there are clauses favour of third parties are revocable, although gratuitous.
Date: Scott
v.
Lady Cranston
10 August 1776
Case No.No 322.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In the marriage settlement between Lord and Lady Cranston, the latter, who brought a large fortune to her husband, was provided to an annuity of L. 700 out of his Lordship's estates, both in England and Scotland, and particularly out of the lands of Crailing and Wauchope in the later; in virtue of which
settlement, his Lordship was infeft in these lands; and by a contract in the English form, of same date with the above settlement, his Lordship's estate in Northumberland is vested in trustees, for securing payment of the said L. 700, in aid of the security on the Scots estates. Lord Cranston being deeply in debt, the lands of Crailing and Wauchope were judicially sold for behoof of his credritors; but in the ranking, Lady Cranston stood preferable for payment of her annuity, and the purchaser was decerned to retain L. 14,000 of the price to answer that annuity. In 1770, Lord Cranston prevailed on his wife to execute a deed, whereby, with consent of her husband, she agreed to renounce her annuity out of the Scots estates, and betake herself to her security on the English property, on this ground, that his Lordship's creditors had consented in that case to give up all their accumulations, and accept of their principal sums, interest and expenses, in full of their demands. Lord Cranston dying in 1771, his widow married Mr Lade; and a claim was now made by both to be ranked on the price of the Scots estates, as unaffected by the foresaid deed of renunciation, which, being a donation inter virum et uxorem stante matrimonio, could not be effectual.——The Lords found, That in the circumstances of the case, the deed of renunciation by Lady Cranston was binding upon her and her husband, for his interest, and that she was bound to implement it. This decision was reversed on appeal. See Appendix.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting