Brember v. Rutherford [1901] ScotLR 39_38 (01 November 1901)

Brember v. Rutherford [1901] ScotLR 39_38 (01 November 1901)

The charge against Brember cannot be sustained because the decree was against Brember & Company, not against Brember individually, and it was proved he was not a partner. There is no warrant for diligence against him under the decree.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 39_38
Parties
Complainer and Reclaimer: William Brember; Respondent: John Rutherford
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 November 1901
Procedural Posture
Note of Suspension / Appeal/reclaiming Motion Before Inner House
Outcome
interlocutor recalled; charge suspended
Legal Topics
Holding Out, Diligence Charge, Liability of Non Partners, Decree Against Firm
Partnership Law Civil Procedure Holding Out Diligence Charge Liability of Non Partners Decree Against Firm

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Brember

Complainer and Reclaimer

John Rutherford

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Note of Suspension / Appeal/reclaiming Motion Before Inner House

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a decree against a firm is a warrant for diligence against a person not a partner, even if held out as a partner
  2. 2 Whether holding out as a partner creates liability for diligence under a decree against the firm

Ratio Decidendi

The charge against Brember cannot be sustained because the decree was against Brember & Company, not against Brember individually, and it was proved he was not a partner. There is no warrant for diligence against him under the decree.

Court Disposition

interlocutor recalled; charge suspended

Orders

  • first plea-in-law for complainer sustained
  • letters and charge suspended simpliciter