Hay v. Paterson [1910] ScotLR 470 (16 March 1910)

Hay v. Paterson [1910] ScotLR 470 (16 March 1910)

By possession for upwards of forty years on the superiority title (Crown charter), consolidation was effected and the personal title to the dominium utile was extinguished. The ruling destination was that contained in the superiority title, and succession fell to the nieces as heirs-portioners under the Crown charter.

Citation
[1910] ScotLR 470
Parties
First Party: Miss Amy Charlotte Paterson Balfour Hay; Second Party: Miss May Marguerite Balfour Hay Paterson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 March 1910
Procedural Posture
Special Case / Judgment of the Inner House, First Division, Court of Session
Outcome
First question of law answered in the negative; second question answered in the affirmative; remaining questions not answered.
Legal Topics
Consolidation of Superiority and Dominium Utile, Prescription, Succession, Feudal Titles
Property Law Feudal Law Consolidation of Superiority and Dominium Utile Prescription Succession Feudal Titles

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Miss Amy Charlotte Paterson Balfour Hay

First Party

Miss May Marguerite Balfour Hay Paterson

Second Party

Procedural Posture

Special Case / Judgment of the Inner House, First Division, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the personal title to the dominium utile under the 1777 marriage contract was extinguished by consolidation through forty years' possession on the superiority title.
  2. 2 Whether the succession to the lands of Mugdrum should be governed by the destination in the marriage contract or the Crown charter.

Ratio Decidendi

By possession for upwards of forty years on the superiority title (Crown charter), consolidation was effected and the personal title to the dominium utile was extinguished. The ruling destination was that contained in the superiority title, and succession fell to the nieces as heirs-portioners under the Crown charter.

Court Disposition

First question of law answered in the negative; second question answered in the affirmative; remaining questions not answered.

Orders

  • Declared that the first and second parties are entitled to the estate as heirs-portioners under the Crown charter.