Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society, Ltd v. Brown and Others [1911] ScotLR 427 (07 February 1911)

Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society, Ltd v. Brown and Others [1911] ScotLR 427 (07 February 1911)

The existence of competing claims to the fund in medio, even if arising from one arrestment and a claim by the policyholder, is sufficient to render an action of multiplepoinding competent. The practice has evolved beyond requiring double distress or double diligence; double claims suffice.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 427
Parties
Pursuer and Real Raiser: Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society, Limited; Common Debtor: John Brown; Defenders (creditors or Pretended Creditors of John Brown): Poole & Company and Alexander Wilson Poole
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 February 1911
Procedural Posture
Multiplepoinding / Inner House, Second Division, Reclaiming Note Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
Reclaiming note refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to.
Legal Topics
Multiplepoinding, Competency of Action, Double Distress, Competing Claims to Insurance Proceeds
Civil Procedure Insurance Law Multiplepoinding Competency of Action Double Distress Competing Claims to Insurance Proceeds

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colonial Mutual Life Assurance Society, Limited

Pursuer and Real Raiser

John Brown

Common Debtor

Poole & Company and Alexander Wilson Poole

Defenders (creditors or Pretended Creditors of John Brown)

Procedural Posture

Multiplepoinding / Inner House, Second Division, Reclaiming Note Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the action of multiplepoinding was competent in the absence of double distress
  2. 2 Whether competing claims to a fund justify multiplepoinding

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of competing claims to the fund in medio, even if arising from one arrestment and a claim by the policyholder, is sufficient to render an action of multiplepoinding competent. The practice has evolved beyond requiring double distress or double diligence; double claims suffice.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming note refused; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to.

Orders

  • Remitted the cause to the Lord Ordinary to proceed therein.