Gracie v. Gracie and Another (Alexander's Trustees) and Others [1910] ScotLR 820 (14 July 1910)

Gracie v. Gracie and Another (Alexander's Trustees) and Others [1910] ScotLR 820 (14 July 1910)

The debt was sufficiently described in the schedule of arrestment as due by the trustees collectively, and arrestment in the hands of each trustee was a valid method of attaching the beneficiary's interest in the trust funds. The objection to the description was hypercritical, and the essentials of a good arrestment were secured.

Citation
[1910] ScotLR 820
Parties
Pursuer/appellant/trustee: John Leburn Gracie; Trustee/arrestee: Charles Archibald Gracie; Defender/respondent/common Debtor/beneficiary: James Alexander Gracie; Defender/respondent/assignee: John Gill, S.S.C.
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 July 1910
Procedural Posture
Action of Furthcoming / Appeal/reclaiming Motion Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; defences repelled; decerned against compearing defenders; cause remitted quoad ultra
Legal Topics
Arrestment, Validity of Arrestment, Description of Debt, Trust Funds, Furthcoming
Trusts Succession Civil Procedure Arrestment Validity of Arrestment Description of Debt Trust Funds Furthcoming

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

Parties

John Leburn Gracie

Pursuer/appellant/trustee

Charles Archibald Gracie

Trustee/arrestee

James Alexander Gracie

Defender/respondent/common Debtor/beneficiary

John Gill, S.S.C.

Defender/respondent/assignee

Procedural Posture

Action of Furthcoming / Appeal/reclaiming Motion Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether arrestments of trust funds in the hands of trustees were valid given the description of the debt
  2. 2 Whether the schedule of arrestment sufficiently described the debt as due by the trustees collectively

Ratio Decidendi

The debt was sufficiently described in the schedule of arrestment as due by the trustees collectively, and arrestment in the hands of each trustee was a valid method of attaching the beneficiary's interest in the trust funds. The objection to the description was hypercritical, and the essentials of a good arrestment were secured.

Court Disposition

interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; defences repelled; decerned against compearing defenders; cause remitted quoad ultra

Orders

  • Recall of Lord Ordinary's interlocutor
  • Repel defences