Meades v. Beardmore & Co., Ltd [1913] ScotLR 9 (01 July 1913)

Meades v. Beardmore & Co., Ltd [1913] ScotLR 9 (01 July 1913)

The motion for trial at the sittings was not timeously made because it was not made in court prior to a day three weeks before the vacation, as required by the Codifying Act of Sederunt, 1913, F, i, 4.

Citation
[1913] ScotLR 9
Parties
Pursuer: William Meades; Defender: William Beardmore & Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 July 1913
Procedural Posture
Action of Damages / Motion for Trial at Vacation Sittings
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Jury Trial, Motion for Trial at Vacation Sittings, Timing of Motions
Civil Procedure Jury Trial Motion for Trial at Vacation Sittings Timing of Motions

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Meades

Pursuer

William Beardmore & Company, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action of Damages / Motion for Trial at Vacation Sittings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a motion for trial at vacation sittings was timeously made under the Codifying Act of Sederunt, 1913, F, i, 4

Ratio Decidendi

The motion for trial at the sittings was not timeously made because it was not made in court prior to a day three weeks before the vacation, as required by the Codifying Act of Sederunt, 1913, F, i, 4.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • Motion for trial at vacation sittings refused