Cochrane v. David Traill & Sons [1901] ScotLR 38_848 (19 July 1901)

The Act does not require compensation agreements to be in writing; proof of a verbal agreement is competent, and the Sheriff was correct to allow proof of the alleged agreement's genuineness.

Citation: [1901] ScotLR 38_848
Parties: Pursuer/respondent: David Cochrane; Defenders/appellants: David Traill & Sons
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 19 July 1901
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutor Allowing Proof of Alleged Agreement
Outcome: appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Workmen's Compensation, Memorandum of Agreement, Proof of Verbal Agreement, Registration of Agreement

Reparation Employment Law Workmen's Compensation Memorandum of Agreement Proof of Verbal Agreement Registration of Agreement

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

David Cochrane

Pursuer/respondent

David Traill & Sons

Defenders/appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Interlocutor Allowing Proof of Alleged Agreement

Legal Issues

1 Whether a verbal agreement for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 can be registered
2 Whether proof of a verbal agreement is competent under the Act

Ratio Decidendi

The Act does not require compensation agreements to be in writing; proof of a verbal agreement is competent, and the Sheriff was correct to allow proof of the alleged agreement's genuineness.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

case remitted to Sheriff for determination of genuineness and warrant to record memorandum if satisfied