Wallace v. University of Standrews [1904] ScotLR 41_812 (14 July 1904)

Wallace v. University of Standrews [1904] ScotLR 41_812 (14 July 1904)

The defenders, having possessed the lands in question for over forty years on a competent heritable title originating from a 1512 charter confirmed by Crown and Parliament, acquired an indefeasible right by positive prescription. The pursuer never obtained possession following the designation or excambion, and the contract of excambion was not registered nor followed by possession. The pursuer's title was at best personal and could not compete with the defenders' heritable title. The absence of infeftment or registration did not defeat the defenders' prescriptive title given the historical context and continuous possession.

Citation
[1904] ScotLR 41_812
Parties
Pursuer: Rev. Robert Wilfred Wallace; Defender: University Court of the University of St Andrews
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 July 1904
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Note) From Lord Ordinary
Outcome
Appeal refused; judgment for defenders affirmed (with variation).
Legal Topics
Prescription, Glebe Lands, Excambion, Heritable Title, Church Property
Property Law Ecclesiastical Law Prescription Glebe Lands Excambion Heritable Title Church Property

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 3 Authorities cited 31 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rev. Robert Wilfred Wallace

Pursuer

University Court of the University of St Andrews

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Note) From Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lands known as Cocks Haugh and Toll Park are the glebe of St Leonard's parish and heritably belong to the pursuer as minister.
  2. 2 Whether the defenders' possession of the lands for over forty years on a competent title excludes the pursuer's claim by operation of positive prescription.
  3. 3 Whether the absence of infeftment or registration in the Register of Sasines affects the defenders' prescriptive title.

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders, having possessed the lands in question for over forty years on a competent heritable title originating from a 1512 charter confirmed by Crown and Parliament, acquired an indefeasible right by positive prescription. The pursuer never obtained possession following the designation or excambion, and the contract of excambion was not registered nor followed by possession. The pursuer's title was at best personal and could not compete with the defenders' heritable title. The absence of infeftment or registration did not defeat the defenders' prescriptive title given the historical context and continuous possession.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; judgment for defenders affirmed (with variation).

Orders

  • The interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary was varied by deleting the words 'or at least for twenty years' and, as so varied, adhered to.
  • The defenders were assoilzied from the conclusions of the summons.