Crichton Brothers v. Crichton [1901] ScotLR 39_165 (04 December 1901)

Crichton Brothers v. Crichton [1901] ScotLR 39_165 (04 December 1901)

Extraction of an interim decree on the merits before taxation of expenses does not bar the successful party from obtaining decree for the taxed expenses subsequently. The Court of Session Act 1850, sec. 28, allows such interim extracts, and there is no procedural rule or principle requiring forfeiture of expenses in these circumstances. The reclaiming-note was competent to challenge the interlocutor.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 39_165
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: Crichton Brothers; Defenders and Reclaimers: Mrs Margaret West or Crichton, John Crichton, and James Crichton
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 December 1901
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (reclaiming Note) / Inner House, Second Division, Post Interlocutor on Expenses
Outcome
Objection to decree for expenses repelled; interlocutor affirmed; reclaiming-note refused.
Legal Topics
Interim Extract of Decree, Expenses (costs), Competency of Reclaiming Note, Court of Session Act 1850, Sec. 28
Civil Procedure Interim Extract of Decree Expenses (costs) Competency of Reclaiming Note Court of Session Act 1850, Sec. 28

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Crichton Brothers

Pursuers and Respondents

Mrs Margaret West or Crichton, John Crichton, and James Crichton

Defenders and Reclaimers

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (reclaiming Note) / Inner House, Second Division, Post Interlocutor on Expenses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether extraction of an interim decree on the merits before taxation of expenses precludes subsequent decree for taxed expenses
  2. 2 Whether the reclaiming-note against the interlocutor approving the auditor's report is competent

Ratio Decidendi

Extraction of an interim decree on the merits before taxation of expenses does not bar the successful party from obtaining decree for the taxed expenses subsequently. The Court of Session Act 1850, sec. 28, allows such interim extracts, and there is no procedural rule or principle requiring forfeiture of expenses in these circumstances. The reclaiming-note was competent to challenge the interlocutor.

Court Disposition

Objection to decree for expenses repelled; interlocutor affirmed; reclaiming-note refused.

Orders

  • Court adhered to the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor approving the auditor's report and decerning for taxed expenses (£295, 19s. 7d.) against the defenders.