Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
In these circumstances Lord Breadalbane brought this process of interdict to have the trustees interdicted from the erection of any bridge which would obstruct his right of navigation in the Falloch.
The Lord Ordinary ( Rutherfurd Clark ) after a proof granted interdict as craved.
Authorities— Colqulhoun's Trs. v. Orr Ewing . Jan. 26, 1877, 4 R. 344 , and (H. of L.), 4 R. 116.
Answered for Lord Breadalbane—The Falloch was proved to be a public navigable river. It was in the power of Lord Breadalbane at any time to deepen the mouth of the river, and that was contemplated in the agreement of 1859. The respondents were not entitled to do anything which would make the navigation less free than it naturally was.
Lord Justice-Clerk —This case comes in the end to a very short and narrow issue. I will not say I have no sympathy with Sir James Colquhoun's trustees, for as far as we see there is no material interest which their proceedings in building this bridge would interfere with; and I should have been glad if the various proposals for settlement had not fallen through, but had been accepted by the Earl of Breadalbane.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
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.