Stirling Parish Council v. Dunblane and Lecropt Parish Council [1911] ScotLR 271 (22 December 1911)

Stirling Parish Council v. Dunblane and Lecropt Parish Council [1911] ScotLR 271 (22 December 1911)

Certification of lunacy is not conclusive as to incapacity at earlier periods but is an item of evidence; proof established that Marjory Faichney's mental condition was unchanged since puberty and she was incapable of acquiring a settlement in Stirling. Section 78 does not preclude appeal where liability is disputed.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 271
Parties
Pursuer: Stirling Parish Council; Defender: Dunblane and Lecropt Parish Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
22 December 1911
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Court of Session Inner House Extra Division, Post Sheriff Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutor adhered.
Legal Topics
Capacity to Acquire Settlement, Pauper Lunatics, Proof of Insanity, Finality of Sheriff's Judgment, Lunacy (scotland) Act 1857 Section 78
Poor Law Lunacy Law Local Government Capacity to Acquire Settlement Pauper Lunatics Proof of Insanity Finality of Sheriff's Judgment Lunacy (scotland) Act 1857 Section 78

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stirling Parish Council

Pursuer

Dunblane and Lecropt Parish Council

Defender

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Court of Session Inner House Extra Division, Post Sheriff Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Marjory Faichney was mentally capable of acquiring a settlement by residence in Stirling parish
  2. 2 Whether the certificate of lunacy is conclusive as to incapacity at earlier periods
  3. 3 Whether section 78 of the Lunacy (Scotland) Act 1857 precludes appeal to the Court of Session

Ratio Decidendi

Certification of lunacy is not conclusive as to incapacity at earlier periods but is an item of evidence; proof established that Marjory Faichney's mental condition was unchanged since puberty and she was incapable of acquiring a settlement in Stirling. Section 78 does not preclude appeal where liability is disputed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutor adhered.

Orders

  • Declarator that Marjory Faichney's settlement is not in Stirling but in Dunblane and Lecropt parish
  • Reimbursement of sums paid for her support to Stirling Parish Council