The Summerlee Iron Co., Ltd v. Caledonian Railway Co. [1911] ScotLR 536 (28 January 1911)

The Summerlee Iron Co., Ltd v. Caledonian Railway Co. [1911] ScotLR 536 (28 January 1911)

It is competent under section 2(g) of the Act of Sederunt 1907 to allow an amendment to pleadings to add an alternative claim for damages where the original remedy of specific implement may become impossible due to supervening circumstances, as this serves to determine the real question in controversy between the parties.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 536
Parties
Pursuer: The Summerlee Iron Company, Limited; Defender: Caledonian Railway Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 January 1911
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Application for Amendment of Summons
Outcome
Amendment allowed
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Competency of Remedies, Act of Sederunt 1907 Section 2(g)

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

Parties

The Summerlee Iron Company, Limited

Pursuer

Caledonian Railway Company

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Application for Amendment of Summons

  1. 1 Is it competent to amend the summons to add an alternative conclusion for damages when specific implement may not be obtainable?
  2. 2 Does section 2(g) of the Act of Sederunt 1907 permit such an amendment?

Ratio Decidendi

It is competent under section 2(g) of the Act of Sederunt 1907 to allow an amendment to pleadings to add an alternative claim for damages where the original remedy of specific implement may become impossible due to supervening circumstances, as this serves to determine the real question in controversy between the parties.

Court Disposition

Amendment allowed

Orders

  • Record to be amended in terms of the minutes for the parties
  • Proof allowed of respective averments bearing on the alternative conclusion of damages