Boag v. Teacher [1900] ScotLR 37_578 (16 March 1900)

Boag v. Teacher [1900] ScotLR 37_578 (16 March 1900)

The magistrates were entitled to sist another partner of the applicant's firm as a party to the original application, which was made on behalf of the firm, and to grant a certificate thereon. The certificate was valid and effectual. However, it would not have been competent to grant a certificate on the supplementary application, as it was not lodged within the statutory period.

Citation
[1900] ScotLR 37_578
Parties
Pursuer: Peter Boag; Pursuer: John Mackie; Defender: William Curtis Teacher; Defender: Lord Provost and Magistrates of the City and royal burgh of Glasgow; Defender: Town-Clerk of the city and royal burgh of Glasgow
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 March 1900
Procedural Posture
Action for Declarator and Reduction / Inner House Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary
Outcome
Pursuers' pleas repelled; defenders assoilzied; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to; defenders awarded expenses.
Legal Topics
Public House Licensing, Death of Applicant, Sisting of Parties, Statutory Compliance, Ultra Vires Acts
Administrative Law Licensing Law Public House Licensing Death of Applicant Sisting of Parties Statutory Compliance Ultra Vires Acts

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 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Boag

Pursuer

John Mackie

Pursuer

William Curtis Teacher

Defender

Lord Provost and Magistrates of the City and royal burgh of Glasgow

Defender

Town-Clerk of the city and royal burgh of Glasgow

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action for Declarator and Reduction / Inner House Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrates acted ultra vires in granting a public-house certificate after the death of the original applicant by sisting another partner of the applicant's firm.
  2. 2 Whether a supplementary application lodged after the statutory deadline could be the basis for a valid certificate.

Ratio Decidendi

The magistrates were entitled to sist another partner of the applicant's firm as a party to the original application, which was made on behalf of the firm, and to grant a certificate thereon. The certificate was valid and effectual. However, it would not have been competent to grant a certificate on the supplementary application, as it was not lodged within the statutory period.

Court Disposition

Pursuers' pleas repelled; defenders assoilzied; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to; defenders awarded expenses.

Orders

  • Certificate granted to William Curtis Teacher (for William Teacher & Sons) held valid.
  • Supplementary application disregarded as incompetent.