Cathcart v. Brown [1905] ScotLR 42_718 (12 July 1905)

The issue of seduction must specify the method or means alleged, such as professed intention to marry, rather than a bare allegation of seduction; the form of issue approved in Forbes v. Wilson is to be followed.

Citation: [1905] ScotLR 42_718
Parties: Pursuer: Jeanie Cathcart; Curator and Administrator in Law for Pursuer: William Cathcart; Defender: Alexander Brown
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 12 July 1905
Procedural Posture: Action of Damages for Breach of Promise and Seduction / Motion to Vary Issues Prior to Trial
Outcome: Motion to vary issues granted; form of issue adjusted to specify method of seduction.
Legal Topics: Seduction, Breach of Promise, Form of Issue

Reparation Family Law Seduction Breach of Promise Form of Issue

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Jeanie Cathcart

Pursuer

William Cathcart

Curator and Administrator in Law for Pursuer

Alexander Brown

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action of Damages for Breach of Promise and Seduction / Motion to Vary Issues Prior to Trial

Legal Issues

1 Whether the pursuer is entitled to a simple issue of seduction or must specify the method of seduction alleged
2 Whether the form of issue should include the means of seduction

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Motion to vary issues granted; form of issue adjusted to specify method of seduction.

Orders

Vary the issues in terms as adjusted at the bar.
Approve of the same as now authenticated, and appoint them to be the issues for the trial of the cause.