Sinclair's Trustees and Others v. Lanarkshire Middle Ward District Committee [1906] ScotLR 44_159 (04 December 1906)

Sinclair's Trustees and Others v. Lanarkshire Middle Ward District Committee [1906] ScotLR 44_159 (04 December 1906)

The road authority lacked statutory or common law power to execute the substantial alteration of the road as done; frontagers have a special right of access and a relevant title to sue for damages or compensation for injurious affection; the action is both relevant and competent, and proof of damage is allowed.

Citation
[1906] ScotLR 44_159
Parties
Pursuer: Isabella Young or Sinclair and another, testamentary trustees of the late John Sinclair, blacksmith, Holepark, Cambuslang, and two other parties; Defender: Middle Ward District Committee of the County Council of Lanark; Defender (for Any Interest It Might Have): Lanarkshire Tramways Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 December 1906
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Relevancy and Competency, Allowing Proof of Averments
Outcome
Proof of averments allowed; action held relevant and competent.
Legal Topics
Road Authority Powers, Compensation for Injurious Affection, Ultra Vires Acts, Frontager Rights, Statutory Interpretation
Administrative Law Property Law Tort Law Local Government Law Road Authority Powers Compensation for Injurious Affection Ultra Vires Acts Frontager Rights +1 more

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 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Isabella Young or Sinclair and another, testamentary trustees of the late John Sinclair, blacksmith, Holepark, Cambuslang, and two other parties

Pursuer

Middle Ward District Committee of the County Council of Lanark

Defender

Lanarkshire Tramways Company

Defender (for Any Interest It Might Have)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Relevancy and Competency, Allowing Proof of Averments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether road authority had statutory or common law power to alter the road as done
  2. 2 Whether frontagers have title to sue for damages or compensation for injurious affection
  3. 3 Whether the action is relevant and competent

Ratio Decidendi

The road authority lacked statutory or common law power to execute the substantial alteration of the road as done; frontagers have a special right of access and a relevant title to sue for damages or compensation for injurious affection; the action is both relevant and competent, and proof of damage is allowed.

Court Disposition

Proof of averments allowed; action held relevant and competent.

Orders

  • Repels first, second, and third pleas-in-law for defenders (except as reserved regarding Water Authorities).
  • Reserves consideration of the fourth plea-in-law until after proof as to date of completion of works.