Maule & Son v. Page & Co. and Others [1909] ScotLR 110 (19 November 1909)

Maule & Son v. Page & Co. and Others [1909] ScotLR 110 (19 November 1909)

The Sheriff Court has exclusive (privative) jurisdiction over actions for sums not exceeding £50, including those against foreign defenders where jurisdiction is founded by arrestment, and such actions are incompetent in the Court of Session. The validity of a claim in multiplepoinding may be challenged by competing claimants on the basis of the competency of the underlying action and diligence.

Citation
[1909] ScotLR 110
Parties
Pursuer and Real Raiser: Maule & Son; Common Debtor/defender: Page & Company; Claimant/reclaimer: Dickson & Walker; Claimant/respondent: Frank Haddow; Claimant/respondent: John Mitchell & Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 November 1909
Procedural Posture
Multiplepoinding and Ranking of Arrestments / Inner House, First Division, Reclaiming Motion (appeal) Against Lord Ordinary's Decision
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; Lord Ordinary's decision adhered to.
Legal Topics
Privative Jurisdiction of Sheriff Court, Competency of Actions Under £50, Arrestment Ad Fundandam Jurisdictionem, Multiplepoinding, Foreign Defender Jurisdiction
Civil Procedure Jurisdiction Privative Jurisdiction of Sheriff Court Competency of Actions Under £50 Arrestment Ad Fundandam Jurisdictionem Multiplepoinding Foreign Defender Jurisdiction

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maule & Son

Pursuer and Real Raiser

Page & Company

Common Debtor/defender

Dickson & Walker

Claimant/reclaimer

Frank Haddow

Claimant/respondent

John Mitchell & Company

Claimant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Multiplepoinding and Ranking of Arrestments / Inner House, First Division, Reclaiming Motion (appeal) Against Lord Ordinary's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an action for less than £50 against a foreign defender, based on arrestment ad fundandam jurisdictionem, is competent in the Court of Session or must be brought in the Sheriff Court under the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1907
  2. 2 Whether competing claimants in a multiplepoinding may challenge the validity of another claimant's decree and arrestment

Ratio Decidendi

The Sheriff Court has exclusive (privative) jurisdiction over actions for sums not exceeding £50, including those against foreign defenders where jurisdiction is founded by arrestment, and such actions are incompetent in the Court of Session. The validity of a claim in multiplepoinding may be challenged by competing claimants on the basis of the competency of the underlying action and diligence.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; Lord Ordinary's decision adhered to.

Orders

  • Claim of Dickson & Walker repelled.
  • Claims of Haddow and Mitchell & Company preferred.