Mackay v. Boswall-Preston and Another [1915] ScotLR 79 (12 November 1915)

Mackay v. Boswall-Preston and Another [1915] ScotLR 79 (12 November 1915)

The Court refused the motion for caution, holding that there is no authority or exceptional circumstance justifying an order for a successful defender to find caution merely because of sequestration after judgment.

Citation
[1915] ScotLR 79
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: James John Mackay; Defenders and Respondents: George Houston Boswall-Preston and another
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 November 1915
Procedural Posture
Civil / Motion in Reclaiming Note After Sequestration of Successful Defender
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Expenses, Caution for Expenses, Sequestration, Reclaiming Note
Civil Procedure Expenses Caution for Expenses Sequestration Reclaiming Note

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

Parties

James John Mackay

Pursuer and Reclaimer

George Houston Boswall-Preston and another

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil / Motion in Reclaiming Note After Sequestration of Successful Defender

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a successful defender whose estate has been sequestrated can be ordered to find caution for expenses on motion by the pursuer in a reclaiming note

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused the motion for caution, holding that there is no authority or exceptional circumstance justifying an order for a successful defender to find caution merely because of sequestration after judgment.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • motion for caution refused