JAMES RITCHIE v JOHN WILSON (Court of Session)

The magistrates, ‘in respect that the agent (defender) was a law practitioner in Glasgow, having writing-chambers within the jurisdiction of the Court, and that the matters forming the subject of this action arose out of the business so carried on by the defender, repelled the preliminary defence, and sustained the competency of the Court.’

The case having been brought before the Court by advocation, the Lord Ordinary pronounced the following interlocutor:—In respect it is not alleged that the ‘defender (advocator) had his place of residence within the jurisdiction of the magistrates of Glasgow, or that the claim pursued for arose out of the advocator's business as an agent in any court in which he practised, sustained the first reason of advocation; and remitted to the magistrates, with this instruction, to recall the interlocutor sustaining their jurisdiction, and to dismiss the action as incompetent.

But the Court , on a reclaiming note for the respondent, ‘altered the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary; and, in respect that the titles were delivered to the advocator in Glasgow—that they still remain there—and that it must be held as pars contractus that they were to be re-delivered to the respondent in the same place, repelled the first reason of advocation; and remitted to the Lord Ordinary to do as he shall see cause upon the merits of the case, and also upon the point of expences.’

Lord Ordinary, Corehouse. Act Jeffrey, A. M'Neill. R. & A. Kennedy, Agents. Alt. Gillies. John Thorburn, Agent. S. Clerk.