Hoy Trust v. Thomson & Anor [2002] ScotSC 202 (15 October 2002)

Hoy Trust v. Thomson & Anor [2002] ScotSC 202 (15 October 2002)

The sheriff principal held that the action for recovery of possession of heritable property should have been raised as a summary cause under section 35(1)(c) of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971, and it was not competent to proceed by summary application. Section 21(4) of the 1991 Act does not override the procedural requirements of the 1971 Act.

Citation
[2002] ScotSC 202
Parties
Pursuer/respondent: The Hoy Trust; Defender/appellant: Terrence B Thomson and another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Summary Application for Warrant of Ejection / Appeal From Sheriff's Interlocutor
Outcome
Appeal sustained; sheriff's interlocutor recalled; summary application dismissed.
Legal Topics
Summary Cause Procedure, Ejection of Tenant, Competency of Summary Application, Agricultural Holdings, Notice to Quit
Landlord and Tenant Agricultural Law Civil Procedure Summary Cause Procedure Ejection of Tenant Competency of Summary Application Agricultural Holdings Notice to Quit

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

Parties

The Hoy Trust

Pursuer/respondent

Terrence B Thomson and another

Defender/appellant

Procedural Posture

Summary Application for Warrant of Ejection / Appeal From Sheriff's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuers were competent to seek a summary warrant of ejection by summary application rather than by summary cause under section 35(1)(c) of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971.

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff principal held that the action for recovery of possession of heritable property should have been raised as a summary cause under section 35(1)(c) of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971, and it was not competent to proceed by summary application. Section 21(4) of the 1991 Act does not override the procedural requirements of the 1971 Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal sustained; sheriff's interlocutor recalled; summary application dismissed.

Orders

  • No expenses due to or by either party in respect of the appeal.
  • Respondents found liable to appellants in expenses of the cause; account to be given in, taxed, and reported.