Inglis' Trustees v. Macpherson [1911] ScotLR 955 (15 June 1911)

Inglis' Trustees v. Macpherson [1911] ScotLR 955 (15 June 1911)

The Court held that the disposition, though ex facie absolute, was in substance a security, and the defender remained proprietor in occupation. Having defaulted in payment, she was subject to summary ejection under section 5 of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 955
Parties
Pursuers: Mrs Catherine A. Hugonin or Inglis, Alton House, Inverness, and Etienne Hugonin, solicitor, there (Mr and Mrs Inglis' marriage contract trustees); Defender: Mrs Rebecca Brown or Macpherson, widow of the late Donald Macpherson, teacher, Inverness
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 June 1911
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, First Division
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutors of Sheriff and Sheriff-Substitute affirmed
Legal Topics
Heritable Security, Ejection, Summary Remedy, Proprietor in Occupation, Heritable Securities (scotland) Act 1894
Property Law Secured Transactions Heritable Security Ejection Summary Remedy Proprietor in Occupation Heritable Securities (scotland) Act 1894

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Catherine A. Hugonin or Inglis, Alton House, Inverness, and Etienne Hugonin, solicitor, there (Mr and Mrs Inglis' marriage contract trustees)

Pursuers

Mrs Rebecca Brown or Macpherson, widow of the late Donald Macpherson, teacher, Inverness

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, First Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defender was a 'proprietor' in occupation under section 5 of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894 and thus subject to summary ejection by the creditor
  2. 2 Whether an absolute disposition was in fact a disposition in security, preserving the defender's status as proprietor

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the disposition, though ex facie absolute, was in substance a security, and the defender remained proprietor in occupation. Having defaulted in payment, she was subject to summary ejection under section 5 of the Heritable Securities (Scotland) Act 1894.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutors of Sheriff and Sheriff-Substitute affirmed

Orders

  • Warrant of ejection granted against the defender from Hanover House, Ness Bank, Inverness
  • Pursuers awarded expenses of the action and appeal