Subject_1 ARRESTMENT. Subject_2 Arrestment affects only bygones and the term current.
Adam Livingston, and Others, v. George Farquhar Kinloch
Date: 10 March 1795 Case No. No 94.
When the rent of the current year is payable at Whitsunday and Martinmas, an arrestment before Whitsunday will only attach the rent payable at that term.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
The rents of the estate of Craigforth (the tenants of which, in general, enter into possession at Martinmas, and pay their rents at Whitsunday and Martinmas, by equal portions) having been arrested by different creditors of the landlord, the tenants raised a process of multiplepoinding, in Which the rents payable at Martinmas 1792 were claimed by Colonel Livingston, and others, upon an arrestment executed on the 12th of November 1791; and, by Mr Farquhar Kinloch, upon an arrestment executed on the 18th June 1792.
The Lord Ordinary, “in respect it is admitted that the rents of the estate of Craigforth are payable at two terms in the year, Whitsunday and Martinmas, in equal portions, found, that the arrestments laid on in the hands of the tenants, on the 12th November 1791, attached only the current rent that became payable at Whitsunday 1792, and that the arrestments on the 18th June 1792, attached the rents that became payable at the term of Martinmas following.”
In a petition for Colonel Livingston against this interlocutor, it was stated, That not only arrears due by a tenant, but current rents may be attached by arrestment. That by current rents, are meant those quorum dies cessit, sed nondum venit. Ersk. b. 3. t. 6. § 9; and that although rents may be made exigible by termly payments, the obligation to pay a year's rent is an unum quid, which cannot be divided, and is wholly incurred by possession for the smallest part of the year; and that, consequently, the rents claimed wear current on the 12th November 1791; on which account, accordingly, the landlord might then have sequestrated the stock of the tenant for payment of them.
The Lords, unanimously, refused the petition without answers.
Lord Ordinary, Ankerville.For the Petitioner, D. Cathcart.Clerk, Menzies.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 44. Fac. Col. No 167. p. 394.
