Walker v. Junor [1903] ScotLR 40_745 (03 July 1903)

Walker v. Junor [1903] ScotLR 40_745 (03 July 1903)

Given the complainer's position not to insist on attendance and the medical evidence regarding the respondent's health, the Court imposed a fine without requiring personal attendance at the bar.

Citation
[1903] ScotLR 40_745
Parties
Complainer: Charles Fountaine Walker; Respondent: William Junor
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 July 1903
Procedural Posture
Petition and Complaint for Breach of Interdict / Judgment on Penalty for Breach
Outcome
Fine imposed; no imprisonment; respondent not required to appear at bar; liable in expenses.
Legal Topics
Breach of Interdict, Enforcement of Court Orders, Penalties
Civil Procedure Property Law Breach of Interdict Enforcement of Court Orders Penalties

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Charles Fountaine Walker

Complainer

William Junor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition and Complaint for Breach of Interdict / Judgment on Penalty for Breach

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent should be required to appear at the bar for sentence after breach of interdict
  2. 2 Appropriate penalty for breach of interdict given health concerns and complainer's position

Ratio Decidendi

Given the complainer's position not to insist on attendance and the medical evidence regarding the respondent's health, the Court imposed a fine without requiring personal attendance at the bar.

Court Disposition

Fine imposed; no imprisonment; respondent not required to appear at bar; liable in expenses.

Orders

  • Respondent to pay a fine of £10
  • Respondent found liable in expenses