Hay (Sharps Trustee) v. Paterson & Co., Ltd [1912] ScotLR 742 (17 May 1912)

Hay (Sharps Trustee) v. Paterson & Co., Ltd [1912] ScotLR 742 (17 May 1912)

The omission to print the amendments was excusable in the circumstances; the statutory requirements were directory, not imperative, and the reclaiming note was competent.

Citation
[1912] ScotLR 742
Parties
Pursuer (respondent): David Allan Hay, C. A., Glasgow, trustee on the sequestrated estate of Mrs Flora Graham Ritchie or Sharp, sole trustee of her deceased husband William Sharp, wine and spirit merchant, Glasgow; Defenders (reclaimers): J. Y. Paterson & Company, Limited, brewers, Edinburgh, and others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 May 1912
Procedural Posture
Civil / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Interlocutor
Outcome
objection repelled; reclaiming note allowed
Legal Topics
Competency of Reclaiming Note, Failure to Print Amendments, Statutory Interpretation
Civil Procedure Competency of Reclaiming Note Failure to Print Amendments Statutory Interpretation

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 1 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David Allan Hay, C. A., Glasgow, trustee on the sequestrated estate of Mrs Flora Graham Ritchie or Sharp, sole trustee of her deceased husband William Sharp, wine and spirit merchant, Glasgow

Pursuer (respondent)

J. Y. Paterson & Company, Limited, brewers, Edinburgh, and others

Defenders (reclaimers)

Procedural Posture

Civil / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the omission to print amendments to the record appended to the reclaiming note rendered the note incompetent under the Judicature Act 1825 and Act of Sederunt 1828

Ratio Decidendi

The omission to print the amendments was excusable in the circumstances; the statutory requirements were directory, not imperative, and the reclaiming note was competent.

Court Disposition

objection repelled; reclaiming note allowed

Orders

  • Reprinting of the record to be done to put the matter in proper form
  • Expenses of the discussion awarded to Mr Constable's client, modified to five guineas