Deans v. Woolfson [1922] ScotLR 148 (31 January 1922)

Deans v. Woolfson [1922] ScotLR 148 (31 January 1922)

A co-proprietor may restore a common stair destroyed by fire on pro indiviso property without the consent of the other co-proprietor, provided the operation is necessary and does not demand contribution from the objector, and the plans accommodate the interests of both parties. The opposition of a co-owner cannot prevent necessary rebuilding operations where equity requires restoration to the status quo ante.

Citation
[1922] ScotLR 148
Parties
Petitioner: John Kirkwood Deans; Objector: Philip Woolfson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 January 1922
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Dean of Guild Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Dean of Guild affirmed.
Legal Topics
Common Property, Pro Indiviso Proprietors, Rebuilding of Common Stair, Right of Co Proprietor to Object, Liability to Contribute
Property Law Common Property Pro Indiviso Proprietors Rebuilding of Common Stair Right of Co Proprietor to Object Liability to Contribute

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Kirkwood Deans

Petitioner

Philip Woolfson

Objector

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Dean of Guild Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a co-proprietor can rebuild a common stair on pro indiviso property without the consent of the other co-proprietor
  2. 2 Whether the opposition of a co-owner can prevent necessary rebuilding operations on common property
  3. 3 Whether liability to contribute arises for a co-owner not using the rebuilt stair

Ratio Decidendi

A co-proprietor may restore a common stair destroyed by fire on pro indiviso property without the consent of the other co-proprietor, provided the operation is necessary and does not demand contribution from the objector, and the plans accommodate the interests of both parties. The opposition of a co-owner cannot prevent necessary rebuilding operations where equity requires restoration to the status quo ante.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Dean of Guild affirmed.

Orders

  • Lining (authority to rebuild the common stair) granted to petitioner.
  • No order as to liability for contribution by the objector.