Moffat Magistrates v. Jardine [1907] ScotLR 749 (20 June 1907)

Moffat Magistrates v. Jardine [1907] ScotLR 749 (20 June 1907)

The interlocutor did not dispose of the whole subject-matter of the cause, as the conclusion for interdict remained undisposed of; therefore, the reclaiming note was not timeously presented and must be refused.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 749
Parties
Pursuer/respondent: Mrs Murray Jardine; Consenter: Arthur Murray Jardine; Defender/reclaimer: Provost, Magistrates, and Councillors of the burgh of Moffat
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 June 1907
Procedural Posture
Action of Declarator and Interdict / Reclaiming Note Against Interlocutor
Outcome
reclaiming note refused
Legal Topics
Finality of Interlocutor, Competency of Reclaiming Note, Court of Session Act 1868 Section 53
Civil Procedure Finality of Interlocutor Competency of Reclaiming Note Court of Session Act 1868 Section 53

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Murray Jardine

Pursuer/respondent

Arthur Murray Jardine

Consenter

Provost, Magistrates, and Councillors of the burgh of Moffat

Defender/reclaimer

Procedural Posture

Action of Declarator and Interdict / Reclaiming Note Against Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the interlocutor disposed of the whole subject-matter of the cause
  2. 2 Whether the reclaiming note was timeously presented

Ratio Decidendi

The interlocutor did not dispose of the whole subject-matter of the cause, as the conclusion for interdict remained undisposed of; therefore, the reclaiming note was not timeously presented and must be refused.

Court Disposition

reclaiming note refused

Orders

  • reclaiming note refused