Pringle, Petitioner [1905] ScotLR 42_385 (21 February 1905)

[ Home ] [ Databases ] [ World Law ] [ Multidatabase Search ] [ Help ] [ Feedback ] [ DONATE ] Scottish Court of Session Decisions You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Pringle, Petitioner [1905] ScotLR 42_385 (21 February 1905) URL: https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1905/42SLR0385.html Cite as: [1905] ScotLR 42_385, [1905] SLR 42_385 [ New search ] [ Printable PDF version ] [ Help ] SCOTTISH_SLR_Court_of_Session Page: 385 ↓ Court of Session Inner House First Division. Tuesday , February 1905 . 42 SLR 385 Pringle, Petitioner. Subject_1 Process Subject_2 Proof Subject_3 Depositions to Lie in retentis. Subject_4 Proof and Oath de calumnia on Commission. Facts: A naval artificer-engineer was the pursuer in an action of divorce. He presented a petition stating that the summons in the action of divorce had been signeted and served edictally on the defender, but could not be called until after the date when the ship on which he and another material witness were serving was under orders to proceed to sea. He therefore craved the Court to appoint a commissioner to take the evidence of himself and the other material witness, the depositions to lie in retentis , and also to take his oath de calumnia The Court granted the prayer of the petition, reserving to the defender all objections competent to her to the competency of the petition. Headnote: This was a petition presented by Peter Pringle, artificer-engineer on H. M. S. ‘Berwick,’ then stationed at Chatham. The petition set forth that the petitioner was a domiciled Scotsman and had raised in the Court of Session an action of divorce against his wife Mrs Amelia Annie Russell or Pringle, then or lately residing at 53 Albany Road, New Brompton, and that the summons was signeted and executed edictally against the defender on 20th February, but could not be called in Court before 7th March. It was further stated that the petitioner and Alfred Baynton, gunner on H. M. S. “Berwick,” were material witnesses in the cause, whose evidence was likely to be lost owing to the ship being under orders to proceed to sea with the Second Cruiser Squadron on February 28th, prior to the expiry of the induciæ , and that it was also necessary for the petitioner to emit the oath de calumnia The defender, it was stated, had no known agent in Scotland. The petitioner therefore prayed the Court to appoint the petition to be intimated to the defender in the action, to grant warrant for citing the said Alfred Baynton as a witness, and to appoint a commissioner to take the evidence of the petitioner and Alfred Baynton, and also to take the petitioner's oath de calumnia and to dispense with interrogatories, the depositions to lie in retentis—Clouston v. Morris , February 15, 1848, 20 Scot. Jur. 228, was referred to at the bar. The Court granted the prayer of the petition, and pronounced this interlocutor—“… Grant diligence at the instance of the petitioner for citing Alfred Baynton, gunner, H. M. S. ‘Berwick,’ and the other necessary witnesses for the petitioner in the action mentioned in the petition, whose evidence owing to their being about to leave the country is in danger of being lost, and grant commission to James Adam, Esq., Advocate, to take the oaths and examinations of the said Alfred Baynton and the petitioners, and to secure any exhibits and productions made by them in regard to the matters at issue between the parties to the said action, at such time and place as the said commissioner may appoint, due notice thereof being given to the defender or her known agent, and also to take the oath of the petitioner de calumnia in common form: Dispense with the adjustment of interrogatories, and appoint the depositions of the witnesses and productions, if any, made by them to be sealed up by the commissioner and immediately thereafter transmitted to the Clerk of the process, there to lie in retentis subject to the future orders of the Court or the Lord Ordinary, to be reported quam primum: Reserving to the defender all objection competent to her to the competency of the petition.” Counsel: Counsel for the Petitioner— Constable. Agent— Thomas Liddle, S. S. C. BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII URL: https://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1905/42SLR0385.html