Lord Advocate v. Marquess of Zetland [1918] ScotLR 559 (28 March 1918)

Lord Advocate v. Marquess of Zetland [1918] ScotLR 559 (28 March 1918)

The Crown is not entitled to one year's free rent as composition upon the entry of a singular successor in Crown holdings, and such rent cannot be taken as the highest casualty for the purpose of calculating compensation payable as redemption under the Feudal Casualties (Scotland) Act 1914. The historical and statutory framework distinguishes the Crown's rights from those of subject-superiors, and the established practice and royal prerogative do not create a statutory entitlement to a year's rent.

Citation
[1918] ScotLR 559
Parties
Pursuer: Lord Advocate; Defender: Marquess of Zetland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 March 1918
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (inner House, First Division)
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; Lord Cullen reversed; Lord President dissenting
Legal Topics
Feudal Casualties, Redemption of Casualties, Crown Vassalage, Composition on Entry, Statutory Interpretation
Property Law Feudal Law Feudal Casualties Redemption of Casualties Crown Vassalage Composition on Entry Statutory Interpretation

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lord Advocate

Pursuer

Marquess of Zetland

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (inner House, First Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Crown is entitled to one year's free rent as composition upon the entry of a singular successor of the last-entered vassal under the Feudal Casualties (Scotland) Act 1914.
  2. 2 Whether such rent can be taken as the highest casualty for the purpose of calculating compensation payable as redemption.

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown is not entitled to one year's free rent as composition upon the entry of a singular successor in Crown holdings, and such rent cannot be taken as the highest casualty for the purpose of calculating compensation payable as redemption under the Feudal Casualties (Scotland) Act 1914. The historical and statutory framework distinguishes the Crown's rights from those of subject-superiors, and the established practice and royal prerogative do not create a statutory entitlement to a year's rent.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; Lord Cullen reversed; Lord President dissenting

Orders

  • Declared that the Crown is not entitled to one year's free rent as composition for entry of a singular successor in Crown holdings.
  • Ordered that compensation for redemption of casualties is not to be calculated on the basis of one year's rent.