Gore v. Westfield Autocar Co., Ltd [1921] ScotLR 488 (15 June 1921)

Gore v. Westfield Autocar Co., Ltd [1921] ScotLR 488 (15 June 1921)

As a special indulgence in the particular circumstances, the Court allowed the reclaiming note signed by the party to be received, but stated this would not form a precedent.

Citation
[1921] ScotLR 488
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Alexander Gore; Defenders and Respondents: Westfield Autocar Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 June 1921
Procedural Posture
Civil / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Lord Ordinary's Decision
Legal Topics
Competency of Reclaiming Note, Requirement for Counsel's Signature, Self Representation
Civil Procedure Competency of Reclaiming Note Requirement for Counsel's Signature Self Representation

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Gore

Pursuer and Reclaimer

Westfield Autocar Company, Limited

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil / Reclaiming Note (appeal) Against Lord Ordinary's Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a reclaiming note not signed by counsel is competent when the party is self-represented

Ratio Decidendi

As a special indulgence in the particular circumstances, the Court allowed the reclaiming note signed by the party to be received, but stated this would not form a precedent.