Thomson v. Thomson [1912] ScotLR 8 (10 July 1912)

Thomson v. Thomson [1912] ScotLR 8 (10 July 1912)

Where the alleged adulteress is not cited as co-defender and has acknowledged the charges and declined to defend, formal intimation under the Act of Sederunt may be dispensed with.

Citation
[1912] ScotLR 8
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs. Thomson; Defender: Mr. Thomson; Alleged Adulteress: Unnamed woman
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 July 1912
Procedural Posture
Divorce / Motion to Dispense With Intimation and Fix Diet of Proof
Outcome
motion granted
Legal Topics
Divorce, Adultery, Procedural Requirements
Family Law Divorce Adultery Procedural Requirements

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs. Thomson

Pursuer

Mr. Thomson

Defender

Unnamed woman

Alleged Adulteress

Procedural Posture

Divorce / Motion to Dispense With Intimation and Fix Diet of Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether formal intimation to the alleged adulteress is required under the Act of Sederunt when she is not cited as co-defender and has acknowledged the charges and declined to defend

Ratio Decidendi

Where the alleged adulteress is not cited as co-defender and has acknowledged the charges and declined to defend, formal intimation under the Act of Sederunt may be dispensed with.

Court Disposition

motion granted

Orders

  • formal intimation dispensed with
  • diet of proof fixed