O'Donnell v. Wilson [1910] ScotLR 707 (21 May 1910)

O'Donnell v. Wilson [1910] ScotLR 707 (21 May 1910)

It is competent for the Sheriff-Substitute as arbitrator to allow the firm to be added as respondents in the application, either by inherent power or by analogy to ordinary procedure, even if rule 79 does not strictly apply. The refusal to amend was based on technicality and not justified in the interests of justice.

Citation
[1910] ScotLR 707
Parties
Appellant: Charles O'Donnell; Respondent: Henry Wilson; Proposed Respondent (firm): Henry Wilson & Sons
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 May 1910
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration (workmen's Compensation) / Appeal to Court of Session Inner House, First Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed; determination of Sheriff-Substitute recalled; case remitted to allow amendment and proceed.
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Amendment of Pleadings, Parties to Proceedings, Sheriff Court Procedure
Labour Law Civil Procedure Workmen's Compensation Amendment of Pleadings Parties to Proceedings Sheriff Court Procedure

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

Parties

Charles O'Donnell

Appellant

Henry Wilson

Respondent

Henry Wilson & Sons

Proposed Respondent (firm)

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration (workmen's Compensation) / Appeal to Court of Session Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether it was competent to amend the application in arbitration proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 by substituting or adding the firm as respondent in place of the individual partner.
  2. 2 Whether such amendment could be made under rule 79 of the First Schedule of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1907.

Ratio Decidendi

It is competent for the Sheriff-Substitute as arbitrator to allow the firm to be added as respondents in the application, either by inherent power or by analogy to ordinary procedure, even if rule 79 does not strictly apply. The refusal to amend was based on technicality and not justified in the interests of justice.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; determination of Sheriff-Substitute recalled; case remitted to allow amendment and proceed.

Orders

  • Recall the determination of the Sheriff-Substitute as arbitrator.
  • Remit to the Sheriff-Substitute to allow the motion to amend the application by adding the firm as respondents and to proceed as accords.