Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 4, Page 154

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 4, Page 154

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] B. Therefore we order you to cause the same A. to have full seisin of the aforesaid
[002] land without delay. Witness etc.’ Thus the missio into seisin is made, so to speak,
[003] by force of a second decree¹ after the seizure of the land into the hand of the lord
[004] king, since the seizure itself is, so to speak, the first.²

What kind of remedy lies for the tenant after he has once lost by default, and until what time.

[006] When the tenant has thus lost by default, we must see if any³ remedy lies for him
[007] who lost and of what kind. It is clear that he has a remedy and a recovery [in a plea]
[008] by writ of right at any time he wishes to sue, until he has so put himself on the grand
[009] assise that the four knights have been summoned to choose twelve, according to
[010] some, and according to others until the twelve have been chosen.⁴ On this matter
[011] there was disagreement among the ancients. And so, apparently, if he has chosen
[012] the duel, until he has waged the duel, for the grand assise and the duel are alike in
[013] many ways. Then, in truth, [formerly] he will have no recovery, because seisin will
[014] be abjudicated from him and his heirs in perpetuity. [Because of the disagreement of
[015] the ancients, nothing certain may be held as to what ought to be done if the default
[016] is made when the four knights have been summoned to choose [etc.], since some say
[017] one thing and some another. But that he ought to have a recovery in this last case
[018] is proved in the roll of Easter term in the sixteenth year of king Henry in the county
[019] of Oxford, [the case] of Fray Punchard,⁵ where neither he nor his heirs were precisely
[020] abjudicated, but should have such recovery as they ought to have.⁶ But that they
[021] ought to have none after the twelve have been chosen, but be completely abjudicated,
[022] is proved in the roll of Michaelmas term in the fourth and the beginning of the fifth
[023] years of king Henry in the county of Buckingham, [the case] of John son of Roland.⁷
[024] Many cases are in accord with this.] The tenant who lost may have his recovery if
[025] there has been a fraudulent deception by the demandant, where no summons at all
[026] was made but it is falsely asserted that there was, and that being found, [there can be]
[027] neither any taking nor any abjudication for default. And if judgment was rendered
[028] for the demandant, whatever has been done will be revoked, as was said above.⁸
[029] And so if his seisin is taken from him in his absence, when he has gone abroad, when
[030] he has not been

Notes

1. Supra iii, 155

2. ‘primum’

3. ‘aliquod’

4. Infra 161, iv, 217

5. B.N.B., no. 688; not in C.R.R. xiv

6. Supra 152

7. B.N.B., no. 307; C.R.R., ix, 341-2

8. Supra 67