Livingstone v. Allan [1901] ScotLR 38_241 (05 December 1901)

Livingstone v. Allan [1901] ScotLR 38_241 (05 December 1901)

The Allans, though bona fide onerous assignees, could only take Alexander's beneficial interest in the property as determined after accounting for the liabilities of the joint-adventure. Livingstone's claim for sums due from Alexander in respect of the joint-adventure was entitled to priority over the Allans' security.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 38_241
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Hugh Livingstone; Defendant: William Brown Alexander; Claimant/reclaimer: James Allan; Claimant/reclaimer: John Allan; Nominal Raiser/pursuer: William M'Luckie Buchan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 December 1901
Procedural Posture
Action of Multiplepoinding / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session; Appeal/reclaiming Motion
Outcome
Court adhered to Lord Ordinary's decision; Livingstone ranked and preferred primo loco for £172, 17s. 6d. out of the fund in medio; Allans ranked for balance; Allans liable in expenses to Livingstone less one-third of taxed expenses of proof.
Legal Topics
Proof of Trust, Joint Adventure, Assignation, Ranking of Claims, Trust Purposes, Beneficial Interest
Trusts Property Law Partnership Law Proof of Trust Joint Adventure Assignation Ranking of Claims Trust Purposes +1 more

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hugh Livingstone

Claimant/respondent

William Brown Alexander

Defendant

James Allan

Claimant/reclaimer

John Allan

Claimant/reclaimer

William M'Luckie Buchan

Nominal Raiser/pursuer

Procedural Posture

Action of Multiplepoinding / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session; Appeal/reclaiming Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assignees of a trust interest must inquire into the terms and purposes of the trust
  2. 2 Whether Alexander could assign more than his beneficial interest after accounting for joint-adventure liabilities
  3. 3 Priority of claims between joint-adventurer and onerous assignees

Ratio Decidendi

The Allans, though bona fide onerous assignees, could only take Alexander's beneficial interest in the property as determined after accounting for the liabilities of the joint-adventure. Livingstone's claim for sums due from Alexander in respect of the joint-adventure was entitled to priority over the Allans' security.

Court Disposition

Court adhered to Lord Ordinary's decision; Livingstone ranked and preferred primo loco for £172, 17s. 6d. out of the fund in medio; Allans ranked for balance; Allans liable in expenses to Livingstone less one-third of taxed expenses of proof.

Orders

  • Livingstone ranked and preferred primo loco for £172, 17s. 6d. out of £273, 7s. 10d. fund in medio.
  • Allans ranked and preferred for balance of fund.