Governors of Trades Maiden Hospital v. Mackersy [1906] ScotLR 44_45 (13 November 1906)
The Court held that sec. 5 of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1874 applies to trustees, and payment in 1880 was 'in terms of this section'; therefore, a second composition became due twenty-five years later in 1905. The action was competent as a simple petitory action, and composition should be calculated on the rental of 1905, not limited to sub-feu-duty.
- Citation
- [1906] ScotLR 44_45
- Parties
- Pursuer: Governors of Trades Maiden Hospital; Defender: William Robert Mackersy
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 13 November 1906
- Procedural Posture
- Petitory Action for Payment of Composition / Inner House Appeal (reclaiming Note) From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
- Outcome
- Defender's reclaiming note refused; Lord Ordinary's interlocutor affirmed.
- Legal Topics
- Feudal Casualties, Trustee Succession, Interpretation of Conveyancing (scotland) Act 1874, Calculation of Composition, Competency of Petitory Action
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Governors of Trades Maiden Hospital
Pursuer
William Robert Mackersy
Defender
Procedural Posture
Petitory Action for Payment of Composition / Inner House Appeal (reclaiming Note) From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a simple petitory action is competent for recovery of casualty under sec. 5 of Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1874
- 2 Whether payment in 1880 was 'in terms of' sec. 5 of the Act
- 3 Whether the twenty-five year rule applies from payment date or implied entry
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that sec. 5 of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1874 applies to trustees, and payment in 1880 was 'in terms of this section'; therefore, a second composition became due twenty-five years later in 1905. The action was competent as a simple petitory action, and composition should be calculated on the rental of 1905, not limited to sub-feu-duty.
Court Disposition
Defender's reclaiming note refused; Lord Ordinary's interlocutor affirmed.
Orders
- Adhere to interlocutor of Lord Mackenzie dated 1st February 1906
- Remit cause to Lord Ordinary to proceed therein
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