Somerville v. Dick [1902] ScotLR 39_836 (08 July 1902)
Cutting away part of the joists of a floor to form a hatchway is an alteration of structure under section 59 of the Edinburgh Municipal and Police Amendment Act 1891, requiring a Dean of Guild warrant. Failure to obtain such a warrant, even in bona fide error, constitutes a technical offence, but in the circumstances only a nominal penalty is appropriate.
- Citation
- [1902] ScotLR 39_836
- Parties
- Petitioner and Respondent: George Somerville, Procurator-Fiscal of Court; Respondent and Appellant: Adam Dick, solicitor, Dundas Street, Edinburgh
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 08 July 1902
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From Dean of Guild Court
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; penalty reduced; expenses awarded in part to appellant.
- Legal Topics
- Dean of Guild Jurisdiction, Building Warrants, Structural Alterations, Penalties for Technical Offences
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
George Somerville, Procurator-Fiscal of Court
Petitioner and Respondent
Adam Dick, solicitor, Dundas Street, Edinburgh
Respondent and Appellant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment After Appeal From Dean of Guild Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether cutting joists to form a hatchway constitutes an 'alteration of structure' under the Edinburgh Municipal and Police Amendment Act 1891, section 59, requiring a Dean of Guild warrant.
- 2 Whether a penalty should be imposed for a technical contravention committed in bona fide error.
Ratio Decidendi
Cutting away part of the joists of a floor to form a hatchway is an alteration of structure under section 59 of the Edinburgh Municipal and Police Amendment Act 1891, requiring a Dean of Guild warrant. Failure to obtain such a warrant, even in bona fide error, constitutes a technical offence, but in the circumstances only a nominal penalty is appropriate.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; penalty reduced; expenses awarded in part to appellant.
Orders
- Modify the penalty from £10 to one shilling, payable by the appellant to the petitioner.
- Find the appellant entitled to expenses up to and including 23rd January 1902, and to subsequent expenses subject to modification (fixed at two-thirds).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment