Coul v. Ayrshire Northern District Committee [1909] ScotLR 338_1 (28 January 1909)

Coul v. Ayrshire Northern District Committee [1909] ScotLR 338_1 (28 January 1909)

The Court allowed the admission of the new evidence because the main factual issue only emerged late in the proceedings, the defenders were not negligent in failing to discover the evidence earlier, and the document was material to the resolution of the statutory exception at issue.

Citation
[1909] ScotLR 338_1
Parties
Pursuer/respondent: Patrick Coul; Defenders/appellants: Ayrshire Northern District Committee
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 January 1909
Procedural Posture
Appeal (interdict) / Application to Admit Fresh Evidence After Proof and Judgment
Outcome
Application granted; proof opened up to admit new evidence.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Fresh Evidence, Statutory Interpretation, Interdict, Public Authority Powers

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Patrick Coul

Pursuer/respondent

Ayrshire Northern District Committee

Defenders/appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal (interdict) / Application to Admit Fresh Evidence After Proof and Judgment

  1. 1 Whether fresh evidence can be admitted after proof and judgment in an appeal from the Sheriff Court
  2. 2 Whether the defenders were negligent in not producing the new evidence earlier
  3. 3 Interpretation of statutory exception regarding 'site of any house or garden'

Ratio Decidendi

The Court allowed the admission of the new evidence because the main factual issue only emerged late in the proceedings, the defenders were not negligent in failing to discover the evidence earlier, and the document was material to the resolution of the statutory exception at issue.

Court Disposition

Application granted; proof opened up to admit new evidence.

Orders

  • Open up the proof.
  • Allow defenders/appellants to put in evidence the bound volume of estate plans and lead proof as to its authenticity and reliability.