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.
This was a case in which the Inspector of Poor of the City Parish of Edinburgh claimed poor rates from the Governors of Heriot's Hospital, in respect of those lands upon which the hospital stood, and the gardens, plantations, and parks attached to the same.
The Lord Advocate (in the absence of Mr Gifford, his junior, who was engaged elsewhere) opened for the pursuer, and contended that by the Poor Law Act of 1845 (8 and 9 Vict. c. 83) all heritages were subject to this assessment except Crown property Page: 28 ↓
The Lord Advocate , in reply, observed that the decision in the case of the University of Edinburgh expressly turned upon the fact that the funds of the University were held for State purposes, and that the Crown had a strong interest in that institution, being patron of several of its chairs.
Counsel for the Pursuer—The Lord Advocate and Mr Giftord . Agents— Webster & Sprott , S.S.C.
Counsel for the Defenders—The Solicitor-General and Mr Millar . Agents— MacRitchie , Bayley , & Henderson , W.S.
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.