Watson v. Burroughes & Watts, Ltd [1910] ScotLR 638 (27 May 1910)
Section 18 of the Judicature Act 1825 is directory, not imperative; since respondents suffered no prejudice from late service, the reclaiming note may proceed, subject to payment of expenses for the procedural fault.
- Citation
- [1910] ScotLR 638
- Parties
- Defender (reclaimer): James Watson; Pursuer (respondent): Burroughes & Watts, Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 27 May 1910
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal (reclaiming Note) / Review of Procedural Compliance With Reclaiming Note Service
- Outcome
- Reclaiming note allowed to proceed; respondents awarded expenses.
- Legal Topics
- Reclaiming Note, Service of Process, Statutory Interpretation, Expenses
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
James Watson
Defender (reclaimer)
Burroughes & Watts, Limited
Pursuer (respondent)
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (reclaiming Note) / Review of Procedural Compliance With Reclaiming Note Service
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether failure to serve copies of reclaiming note on respondents' agents before the case was called is fatal to the reclaiming note under section 18 of the Judicature Act 1825
- 2 Whether section 18 of the Judicature Act 1825 is directory or imperative
Ratio Decidendi
Section 18 of the Judicature Act 1825 is directory, not imperative; since respondents suffered no prejudice from late service, the reclaiming note may proceed, subject to payment of expenses for the procedural fault.
Court Disposition
Reclaiming note allowed to proceed; respondents awarded expenses.
Orders
- Case to continue in the roll.
- Respondents awarded two guineas of expenses due to fault of reclaimer's agents.
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