Brown v. Harvey [1907] ScotLR 400 (27 February 1907)

Brown v. Harvey [1907] ScotLR 400 (27 February 1907)

The Court held that the pursuer's averments were as specific as usual or necessary in actions for seduction and that it was inexpedient to decide relevancy at this stage; proof before answer was allowed.

Citation
[1907] ScotLR 400
Parties
Pursuer: Annie Brown; Defender: Edward Harvey
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 February 1907
Procedural Posture
Action for Damages for Seduction and Aliment / Proof Before Answer; Reclaiming Note
Outcome
Court adhered to the interlocutor of Lord Salvesen and refused the reclaiming note.
Legal Topics
Seduction, Aliment, Relevancy of Averments
Reparation Family Law Seduction Aliment Relevancy of Averments

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Annie Brown

Pursuer

Edward Harvey

Defender

Procedural Posture

Action for Damages for Seduction and Aliment / Proof Before Answer; Reclaiming Note

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are the pursuer's averments relevant to support a claim for damages for seduction?
  2. 2 Is the action for aliment of an illegitimate child competent in the Court of Session?

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the pursuer's averments were as specific as usual or necessary in actions for seduction and that it was inexpedient to decide relevancy at this stage; proof before answer was allowed.

Court Disposition

Court adhered to the interlocutor of Lord Salvesen and refused the reclaiming note.

Orders

  • Proof before answer allowed.
  • Adjustment of issues dispensed with.