Anderson v. M'Cracken Brothers [1900] ScotLR 37_587 (16 March 1900)

Anderson v. M'Cracken Brothers [1900] ScotLR 37_587 (16 March 1900)

The terms of the mineral disposition, construed in light of the circumstances and custom at the time of grant, implied a right for the mineral owners to work by the long-wall system and bring down the surface, subject only to payment of damages for injury to buildings and surface as stipulated. The pursuer was not entitled to interdict, and the right of support was surrendered by necessary implication.

Citation
[1900] ScotLR 37_587
Parties
Pursuer: Thomas Anderson of Langdales; Defender: M'Cracken Brothers (and individual partners); Defender: Marriage-contract trustees of James Mitchell and his wife; Defender: Testamentary trustees of Mrs Margaret Thomson Rankin or Alston; Defender: John Motherwell Alston; Defender: John Rankin, coalmaster
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 March 1900
Procedural Posture
Civil (declarator, Interdict, Damages) / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House
Outcome
Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; defenders assoilzied (absolved) from declarator and interdict; pursuer found liable in expenses as for one appearance from closing of record, plus a watching fee.
Legal Topics
Right of Support, Conveyance of Minerals, Surface Damage, Implied Rights, Custom of District, Expenses of Litigation
Property Law Mining Law Right of Support Conveyance of Minerals Surface Damage Implied Rights Custom of District Expenses of Litigation

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thomas Anderson of Langdales

Pursuer

M'Cracken Brothers (and individual partners)

Defender

Marriage-contract trustees of James Mitchell and his wife

Defender

Testamentary trustees of Mrs Margaret Thomson Rankin or Alston

Defender

John Motherwell Alston

Defender

John Rankin, coalmaster

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (declarator, Interdict, Damages) / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary to Inner House

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the mineral owners had an implied right to bring down the surface by long-wall mining under the terms of the mineral disposition.
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was entitled to interdict against such working and damages.
  3. 3 How expenses should be allocated where multiple defenders with the same interest are separately represented.

Ratio Decidendi

The terms of the mineral disposition, construed in light of the circumstances and custom at the time of grant, implied a right for the mineral owners to work by the long-wall system and bring down the surface, subject only to payment of damages for injury to buildings and surface as stipulated. The pursuer was not entitled to interdict, and the right of support was surrendered by necessary implication.

Court Disposition

Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; defenders assoilzied (absolved) from declarator and interdict; pursuer found liable in expenses as for one appearance from closing of record, plus a watching fee.

Orders

  • Recall interlocutor of 9 November 1899.
  • Assoilzie defenders from conclusions of declarator and interdict.