Middlemas v. Gibson and Others [1910] ScotLR 522 (17 March 1910)

Middlemas v. Gibson and Others [1910] ScotLR 522 (17 March 1910)

Where money is placed in an agent's hands for a specific purpose which fails, the agent is absolutely bound to return the money and cannot plead compensation or retention for debts owed by the principal.

Citation
[1910] ScotLR 522
Parties
Pursuer (appellant): William Middlemas; Defender (respondent): John Gibson (as trustee on the sequestrated estates of Stephen Haddow); Defenders (respondents): John M'Gaan and others (creditors of Haddow)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 March 1910
Procedural Posture
Multiplepoinding / Appeal From Sheriff Substitute to Court of Session Inner House, First Division
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute affirmed
Legal Topics
Compensation, Specific Appropriation, Failure of Purpose, Right to Retain, Mandate, Law Agent's Lien
Trusts and Estates Bankruptcy Agency Law Compensation Specific Appropriation Failure of Purpose Right to Retain Mandate +1 more

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

Parties

William Middlemas

Pursuer (appellant)

John Gibson (as trustee on the sequestrated estates of Stephen Haddow)

Defender (respondent)

John M'Gaan and others (creditors of Haddow)

Defenders (respondents)

Procedural Posture

Multiplepoinding / Appeal From Sheriff Substitute to Court of Session Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a law agent may retain or set off debts owed to him from funds given for a specific purpose when that purpose fails
  2. 2 Whether compensation or retention is competent where money is specifically appropriated for a failed purpose

Ratio Decidendi

Where money is placed in an agent's hands for a specific purpose which fails, the agent is absolutely bound to return the money and cannot plead compensation or retention for debts owed by the principal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Sheriff-Substitute affirmed

Orders

  • Pursuer not entitled to deduct business accounts from the sum held; must return the full amount