Rudman v. Jay & Co. [1908] ScotLR 411 (07 February 1908)

Rudman v. Jay & Co. [1908] ScotLR 411 (07 February 1908)

The pursuer was imprisoned under a legal warrant regularly obtained and executed. There were no relevant averments of malice or facts from which malice could be inferred. The defenders acted within their rights, and the action for damages is irrelevant.

Citation
[1908] ScotLR 411
Parties
Pursuer/respondent: Trevor Inglis Rudman; Defenders/reclaimers: Jay & Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 February 1908
Procedural Posture
Action for Damages for Wrongous Arrestment and Imprisonment / Inner House Appeal, Final Judgment
Outcome
Action dismissed; decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders.
Legal Topics
Wrongous Use of Diligence, Imprisonment for Debt, Malice in Enforcement of Decree, Hire Purchase Agreements, Sequestration, Cessio
Reparation Civil Procedure Wrongous Use of Diligence Imprisonment for Debt Malice in Enforcement of Decree Hire Purchase Agreements Sequestration Cessio

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 2 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trevor Inglis Rudman

Pursuer/respondent

Jay & Company

Defenders/reclaimers

Procedural Posture

Action for Damages for Wrongous Arrestment and Imprisonment / Inner House Appeal, Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether imprisonment under a decree ad factum prœstandum, regularly obtained and executed, can give rise to damages for wrongous arrestment and imprisonment
  2. 2 Whether averments of malice or want of probable cause are relevant in such circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer was imprisoned under a legal warrant regularly obtained and executed. There were no relevant averments of malice or facts from which malice could be inferred. The defenders acted within their rights, and the action for damages is irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders.

Orders

  • Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary recalled.
  • Second and fourth pleas-in-law for defenders sustained.