M'Gregor and Others v. Cox and Others (Council of University College, Dundee) [1900] UKHL 611 (16 November 1900)
The House of Lords refused to entertain the appeal because the validity of the Ordinance had already been decided in Metcalfe v. Cox, and the provisions for affiliation and incorporation were within the statutory authority conferred by the Universities (Scotland) Act 1889.
- Citation
- [1900] UKHL 611
- Parties
- Pursuers and Appellants: M'Gregor and Others; Defenders and Respondents: Cox and Others (Council of University College, Dundee)
- Jurisdiction
- United Kingdom
- Judgment Date
- 16 November 1900
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Final Judgment in House of Lords
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; interlocutors affirmed
- Legal Topics
- University Affiliation, Statutory Authority, Ordinance Validity
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
M'Gregor and Others
Pursuers and Appellants
Cox and Others (Council of University College, Dundee)
Defenders and Respondents
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Judgment in House of Lords
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether Ordinance No. 46, St Andrews No. 5, affiliating University College, Dundee, to University of St Andrews, was within the authority conferred by the Universities (Scotland) Act 1889
- 2 Whether the House of Lords could entertain the appeal given prior decision in Metcalfe v. Cox
Ratio Decidendi
The House of Lords refused to entertain the appeal because the validity of the Ordinance had already been decided in Metcalfe v. Cox, and the provisions for affiliation and incorporation were within the statutory authority conferred by the Universities (Scotland) Act 1889.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; interlocutors affirmed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
- Interlocutors appealed from affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment