Menzies v. Wentworth [1901] ScotLR 38_672 (18 June 1901)

Menzies v. Wentworth [1901] ScotLR 38_672 (18 June 1901)

The pursuer failed to prove material injury or destruction to the trout-fishing in Loch Rannoch caused by excessive fishing. Judicial regulation is only warranted upon clear evidence of abuse or injury, which was not established. Allocation of fishing rights by frontage is not competent under the established legal principles governing common rights in the loch.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 38_672
Parties
Pursuer: Sir Robert Menzies, Bart., Menzies; Defender: Bruce Canning Vernon Wentworth of Dall; Defender: James Clark Bunten of Dunalastair; Defender: Alexander Stewart of Bunrannoch; Defender: J. S. O. Robertson-Luxford of Croiscraig; Defender: Alasdair Stewart Robertson of Struan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 June 1901
Procedural Posture
Civil Action / Appeal/reclaiming Motion From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
action dismissed
Legal Topics
Common Right of Fishing, Judicial Regulation, Riparian Rights, Allocation of Fishing Rights, Abuse of Common Property
Property Law Environmental Law Common Right of Fishing Judicial Regulation Riparian Rights Allocation of Fishing Rights Abuse of Common Property

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sir Robert Menzies, Bart., Menzies

Pursuer

Bruce Canning Vernon Wentworth of Dall

Defender

James Clark Bunten of Dunalastair

Defender

Alexander Stewart of Bunrannoch

Defender

J. S. O. Robertson-Luxford of Croiscraig

Defender

Alasdair Stewart Robertson of Struan

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Appeal/reclaiming Motion From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court should regulate the exercise of common trout-fishing rights in Loch Rannoch
  2. 2 Whether allocation of fishing rights by frontage is legally competent
  3. 3 What constitutes abuse of a common right of fishing warranting judicial intervention

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to prove material injury or destruction to the trout-fishing in Loch Rannoch caused by excessive fishing. Judicial regulation is only warranted upon clear evidence of abuse or injury, which was not established. Allocation of fishing rights by frontage is not competent under the established legal principles governing common rights in the loch.

Court Disposition

action dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment of Lord Ordinary affirmed
  • Action dismissed