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.
Subject_1 Retention Subject_2 Interim Decree Subject_3 Charge Subject_4 Suspension. Facts: Suspension of charge on interim decree in an action for payment of money, on the ground that the complainer had a right of retention in respect of having subsequently in the action obtained a judgment against the charger for a sum of expenses, which judgment was under review, refused.
Lord Deas —There are some circumstances where, when parties litigate, the Court may equitably interfere to stop a party from enforcing even a legal right while the proceedings are going on. But it is not necessary to consider that here, for here the complainer does not plead any equitable considerations, but grounds his claim on the legal right of retention. If he has it, we have no discretion. If he has it not, then we cannot give it him. But whatever equitable claim he might have had, he cannot plead any legal right of retention.
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.