These in Scotland are not sealed, but must be signed on every page by the parties, and on the last page the signatures must be attested by those of two male witnesses, whose names and designations, together with the name and designation of the person who wrote the deed, must be stated in the "testing clause" (attestation). In the same place must be stated the number of pages of which the deed consists, and the date when and place where executed. When the necessary formalities above mentioned are complied with, the deed is said to be probative, i.e., it proves itself, unless an action is brought to set it aside on some legal ground. Holograph deeds, i.e., those written wholly by the hand of the grantor, are also privileged to the extent of being admitted without the attestation of witnesses, except as to the date of execution, which, when material, must be proved otherwise. A deed cannot be subscribed by a mark; but when the party cannot write, it must be subscribed for him in his presence by two notaries, and before four witnesses. There is no distinction resembling that between deeds poll and indentures, but a deed poll is sometimes called a unilateral deed. (See Erasures.)
Legal Subject: Deeds |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Cockburn v. Duncan | 1802 | Heritage, Rents, Deeds | Janet Cockburn Haldane, Margaret, Euphemia and Elisabeth Haldane, daughters of Mr. George Haldane, brought an action to recover the payments and rents over the lands of Geneagles. George Haldane had inherited the real estate from his uncle Robert Haldane by virtue of a deed of tailzie and bonds of provision. The defendant, Viscount Duncan, argued that the pursuers’ allegations were unsupported because Robert Haldane has given to him the right over those properties. |
| Dr William Liechman, Principal of the College of Glasgow, and Others v. Dr Robert Trail, and Others | 1770 | Powers of the Principal and Masters of the University, Deed, Deeds, Faculty, Patronage, Representation | The pursuers called into question an attempt by Doctor Leechman and others to impose a rigid interpretation of the constitution of the University of Glasgow, which would bar the rector and faculty from participating in the university's fiscal administration. The parties called attention to the set of rules prescribed by King James VI in 1577 concerning the government of the College and its funds. The Lord Ordinary found that based on the charter granted by the king, the whole revenue and property of the university (excepting such mortifications for bursars and other uses which are otherwise conveyed) was vested in the Principal and Masters. The Defenders asked the Lord Ordinary to alter his interlocutor. |
Documents discussing this subject (7)
- Dr William Liechman, Principal of the College of Glasgow, and Others v. Dr Robert Trail, and Others — Petition, 4 Dec 1770
- Janet Clunie v. William Drysdale — Answers, 15 Feb 1831
- John — Petition, 28 May 1793
- Petition — Alexander Lord Banff
- Petition — John Henderson, Esq; against Lord Armadale's Interlocutor
- Principal and Professors of the College of Glasgow v. William Lindsay — Information, 12 Nov 1793
- Strathmore's Trustees v. Strathmore — Reclaiming Note, 4 Apr 1833 [2]