Morrison v. R. W. Forsyth, Ltd [1908] ScotLR 273 (15 December 1908)
Temporary banners advertising special sales, customary in the trade and not interfering with the structure of the premises, do not constitute a breach of the lease or justify a permanent interdict. Each case must be judged on its own facts, and the use here was reasonable and within the scope of the lease.
- Citation
- [1908] ScotLR 273
- Parties
- Pursuer/respondent: Hugh Morrison; Defender/appellant: R. W. Forsyth, Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 15 December 1908
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Inner House, Court of Session
- Outcome
- appeal sustained; interdict refused
- Legal Topics
- Lease Interpretation, Use of Leased Premises, Advertising on Premises, Interdict (injunction)
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hugh Morrison
Pursuer/respondent
R. W. Forsyth, Limited
Defender/appellant
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Inner House, Court of Session
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the tenant's erection of temporary advertising banners on the exterior walls of leased premises is a breach of the lease or otherwise unlawful
- 2 Whether the landlord is entitled to a permanent interdict restraining such advertising
Ratio Decidendi
Temporary banners advertising special sales, customary in the trade and not interfering with the structure of the premises, do not constitute a breach of the lease or justify a permanent interdict. Each case must be judged on its own facts, and the use here was reasonable and within the scope of the lease.
Court Disposition
appeal sustained; interdict refused
Orders
- interlocutor of the Sheriff-Substitute recalled
- interdict craved by pursuer refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment