Chrystal v. Chrystal [1900] ScotLR 37_278 (11 January 1900)

Chrystal v. Chrystal [1900] ScotLR 37_278 (11 January 1900)

The written acknowledgment of debt by the defender is sufficient evidence of the loan and debt resting-owing. Payments made by the defender, as recorded in the pursuer's cash-book and admissions, cannot be attributed to discharge of the £511, 3s. loan, as they were expressly allocated to another debt. Circumstances do not amount to implied discharge or payment, and mora and taciturnity do not bar the pursuer's claim. The pursuer is entitled to decree for the sum first concluded for, with interest as agreed.

Citation
[1900] ScotLR 37_278
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Marion Irvine Mackie or Chrystal; Defender: Robert Chrystal
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 January 1900
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; interlocutor adhered to.
Legal Topics
Loan, Proof of Loan, Implied Discharge, Mora and Taciturnity, Payment of Debt, Reference to Oath
Contract Debt Recovery Loan Proof of Loan Implied Discharge Mora and Taciturnity Payment of Debt Reference to Oath

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Marion Irvine Mackie or Chrystal

Pursuer

Robert Chrystal

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the written acknowledgment of debt is sufficient evidence of a loan and debt resting-owing
  2. 2 Whether payments made by the defender can be attributed to discharge of the loan
  3. 3 Whether circumstances amount to implied discharge or payment

Ratio Decidendi

The written acknowledgment of debt by the defender is sufficient evidence of the loan and debt resting-owing. Payments made by the defender, as recorded in the pursuer's cash-book and admissions, cannot be attributed to discharge of the £511, 3s. loan, as they were expressly allocated to another debt. Circumstances do not amount to implied discharge or payment, and mora and taciturnity do not bar the pursuer's claim. The pursuer is entitled to decree for the sum first concluded for, with interest as agreed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; interlocutor adhered to.

Orders

  • Defender to pay pursuer £511, 3s. sterling with interest at 4% per annum from 27 June 1879 until payment.
  • Defender assoilzied from second conclusion (claim for £2000).