Hutchison v. Hutchison [1908] ScotLR 783 (17 June 1908)

Hutchison v. Hutchison [1908] ScotLR 783 (17 June 1908)

The Court held that the procedural failure to box copies of the record with the reclaiming note was excusable due to a change of agency and a genuine, uncontrollable mistake. Since the applicant could have achieved the same result by petition under section 16 of the 1808 Act, it was unnecessary to require a formal petition. The objection to competency was repelled and the reclaiming note allowed to proceed.

Citation
[1908] ScotLR 783
Parties
Pursuer (reclaimer): John Patterson Hutchison; Defender (respondent): Mrs Agnes Forrest Stevenson or Hutchison
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 June 1908
Procedural Posture
Divorce Action (desertion) / Reclaiming Note (appeal) on Competency Objection
Outcome
Objection to competency repelled; cause appointed to the roll.
Legal Topics
Reclaiming Note, Procedural Competency, Divorce for Desertion, Failure to Box Record, Excusable Mistake
Civil Procedure Family Law Reclaiming Note Procedural Competency Divorce for Desertion Failure to Box Record Excusable Mistake

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Patterson Hutchison

Pursuer (reclaimer)

Mrs Agnes Forrest Stevenson or Hutchison

Defender (respondent)

Procedural Posture

Divorce Action (desertion) / Reclaiming Note (appeal) on Competency Objection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to box copies of the record with the reclaiming note renders the reclaiming note incompetent
  2. 2 Whether an excusable procedural mistake justifies dispensing with strict compliance with procedural rules

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the procedural failure to box copies of the record with the reclaiming note was excusable due to a change of agency and a genuine, uncontrollable mistake. Since the applicant could have achieved the same result by petition under section 16 of the 1808 Act, it was unnecessary to require a formal petition. The objection to competency was repelled and the reclaiming note allowed to proceed.

Court Disposition

Objection to competency repelled; cause appointed to the roll.

Orders

  • Reclaiming note received and cause to be put to the roll.