“The pursuer, however, objected to the competency of thus introducing Hepburn as a party to the submission, and to decree being pronounced in his name; but after considerable discussion, the arbiters …”
You're reading the free summary of Colonel ROBERT HENRY v DAVID BURNS, and the TRUSTEES of the deceased Henry Hepburn, and DAVID HEPBURN (Court of Session). Create a free account to unlock the full reasoning, the cited authorities and the verbatim judgment — plus structured briefs for 412,000+ UK judgments.
No card required. Free forever.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Falls back to Google for old citations BAILII catalogues separately
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.