WILLIAM SELKIRK v WILLIAM LAIDLAW (Court of Session)

An action had been brought before the justices of the peace of the county of Roxburgh, by William Laidlaw, tacksman of Kenmuir toll-bar, against William Selkirk, for an alleged violation of the turnpike acts. Decree in absence was pronounced against Selkirk by the justices, on the 4th May 1824, for the payment of a penalty of £3. 10s. with £1. 15s. of expences of process.

Thereafter, on the 2d July 1825, the present action of reduction and damages was raised by Selkirk against Laidlaw, on the ground that, in the circumstances of the case, the defender's claims were ultra vires of the justices.

It was answered —That the act could only be intended to apply to prosecutions for penalties or fines for any illegal and extrajudicial act committed, or wrong done, in relation to the turnpike statutes, but not to judicial sentences pronounced by the justices, or other judges ordinary, nor to cases where the justices or other judges had acted ultra vires .

The Lord Ordinary ‘Repelled the defence.’ But the Court (with the exception of Lord Craigie) upon the ground that the words of the act were general, and extended to all wrongs done, or injuries suffered, or fact committed in pursuance of any of the powers given by this or any turnpike act, and that, supposing a wrong had been committed by the sentence in question, it was one for which the party who obtained the sentence was answerable, ‘altered the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary; sustained the preliminary defence; and dismissed the action as incompetent,’ &c.

Lord Medwyn, Ordinary. Act. Sol. Gen. (Hope) W. Bell. Don. M'Lean W. S. Agent. Alt. Fullarton, G. Graham Bell. John Marshall, Agent. Sir W. Scott, Clerk.