Fergusson v. M'Quater [1911] ScotLR 560 (07 March 1911)

Fergusson v. M'Quater [1911] ScotLR 560 (07 March 1911)

The application of artificial manure, even when required by lease, is an 'improvement' under the Act. The landlord's alleged benefit in fixing rent is not a specific benefit within the meaning of the Act. The tenant is entitled to compensation for the unexhausted value of artificial manure applied under lease obligation. Expenses of proceedings before the Sheriff are to be awarded by the Sheriff.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 560
Parties
Landlord/respondent: Sir Charles Fergusson, Baronet; Tenant/appellant: James M'Quater
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 March 1911
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (arbitration Stated Case) / Appeal From Sheriff Substitute to Court of Session Inner House, First Division
Outcome
Appeal sustained. Question of law answered in the affirmative: tenant entitled to claim compensation for unexhausted value of artificial manure applied under lease obligation.
Legal Topics
Compensation for Improvements, Lease Obligations, Statutory Interpretation, Expenses in Arbitration, Agricultural Holdings (scotland) Act 1908
Land Law Agricultural Law Contract Law Compensation for Improvements Lease Obligations Statutory Interpretation Expenses in Arbitration Agricultural Holdings (scotland) Act 1908

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sir Charles Fergusson, Baronet

Landlord/respondent

James M'Quater

Tenant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (arbitration Stated Case) / Appeal From Sheriff Substitute to Court of Session Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is a tenant entitled to compensation for the unexhausted value of artificial manures applied under a lease obligation, under the Agricultural Holdings (Scotland) Act 1908?
  2. 2 Does a lease clause requiring application of artificial manure deprive the tenant of statutory compensation rights?
  3. 3 Who is responsible for expenses of proceedings before the Sheriff in a stated case under the Act?

Ratio Decidendi

The application of artificial manure, even when required by lease, is an 'improvement' under the Act. The landlord's alleged benefit in fixing rent is not a specific benefit within the meaning of the Act. The tenant is entitled to compensation for the unexhausted value of artificial manure applied under lease obligation. Expenses of proceedings before the Sheriff are to be awarded by the Sheriff.

Court Disposition

Appeal sustained. Question of law answered in the affirmative: tenant entitled to claim compensation for unexhausted value of artificial manure applied under lease obligation.

Orders

  • Tenant entitled to compensation for unexhausted value of artificial manure applied as required by lease.
  • Expenses awarded to appellant (tenant) in both Court of Session and Sheriff Court.