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 a case where an absolute order had been granted in the form prescribed by Schedule C, charging the fee of a glebe with an annual rent charge in respect of an advance made to the parish minister for improvements on the glebe—held (aff. the judgment of the Court of Session) that the Enclosure Commissioners had not a personal action against the succeeding minister for the rent charge under the Act.
Now, my Lords, I think that the language of the Act does not necessarily, and does not even Page: 791 ↓
Therefore, my Lords, upon the construction of sec. 61, I am unable to find anything which by necessary inference confers upon the company a right which undoubtedly is not conferred upon them anywhere in terms, or creates a personal liability which undoubtedly there is no language expressly to create.
Then the 69th section undoubtedly speaks of “the person for the time being bound to pay the yearly or other periodical payments of such charge.” I say again with regard to that, that it is not possible, whatever may be the meaning of those words and however they may have come to be used, to derive from them such assistance in construing the other section as to find in it the imposition of a liability which the words are not, I think, apt to create.
Upon these grounds, my Lords, I think that the judgment of the Court below was right, and I move your Lordships that this appeal be dismissed with costs.
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.