Gilchrist & Co. v. Smith [1901] ScotLR 38_238 (09 January 1901)

Respondents are only entitled to ordinary modified expenses because they printed documents without consulting the appellant, contrary to the ordinary rule.

Citation: [1901] ScotLR 38_238
Parties: Pursuer/respondent: James Gilchrist & Company; Defender/appellant: Walter Smith
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 09 January 1901
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Determine Expenses
Outcome: Respondents entitled only to £3, 3s. of expenses.
Legal Topics: Expenses, Appeal, Withdrawal of Appeal, Printing of Documents

Civil Procedure Expenses Appeal Withdrawal of Appeal Printing of Documents

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

James Gilchrist & Company

Pursuer/respondent

Walter Smith

Defender/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Determine Expenses

Legal Issues

1 Whether respondents are entitled to full expenses when appeal is withdrawn before hearing and they have printed correspondence without consulting appellant

Ratio Decidendi

Respondents are only entitled to ordinary modified expenses because they printed documents without consulting the appellant, contrary to the ordinary rule.

Court Disposition

Respondents entitled only to £3, 3s. of expenses.

Orders

Appeal dismissed on appellant's motion.
Respondents awarded £3, 3s. of modified expenses.