M'Ewen and Others v. Steedman & M'Alister [1913] ScotLR 505 (13 March 1913)

M'Ewen and Others v. Steedman & M'Alister [1913] ScotLR 505 (13 March 1913)

The Court found that the remedial works executed by the defenders were satisfactory and had removed the nuisance, as confirmed by the expert report, making it unnecessary to grant interdict. Expenses were allocated to the pursuers up to the date of the remit and to the defenders thereafter, including the cost of the expert report.

Citation
[1913] ScotLR 505
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Mary Gibb or M'Ewen, wife of Charles M'Ewen, hosier, Hillhead, Glasgow, and others; Defender: Steedman & M'Alister, cork manufacturers, Glasgow
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 March 1913
Procedural Posture
Action of Interdict / Judgment After Remit to Expert and Hearing on Expenses
Outcome
Petition for interdict dismissed; remedial works held satisfactory; expenses allocated between parties as per interlocutor.
Legal Topics
Nuisance, Interdict, Remedial Measures, Expenses
Civil Procedure Property Law Tort Law Nuisance Interdict Remedial Measures Expenses

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Mary Gibb or M'Ewen, wife of Charles M'Ewen, hosier, Hillhead, Glasgow, and others

Pursuer

Steedman & M'Alister, cork manufacturers, Glasgow

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action of Interdict / Judgment After Remit to Expert and Hearing on Expenses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the nuisance caused by vibration from a gas engine was abated by remedial works
  2. 2 Whether interdict should be granted after remedial works
  3. 3 Allocation of expenses after remedial works and expert report

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the remedial works executed by the defenders were satisfactory and had removed the nuisance, as confirmed by the expert report, making it unnecessary to grant interdict. Expenses were allocated to the pursuers up to the date of the remit and to the defenders thereafter, including the cost of the expert report.

Court Disposition

Petition for interdict dismissed; remedial works held satisfactory; expenses allocated between parties as per interlocutor.

Orders

  • Hold the defenders' remedial works satisfactory in terms of the expert report
  • Find it unnecessary to grant interdict