Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway Co. v. Miller

Subject_1 Poor Subject_2 Assessment Subject_3 Deductions. Facts: (1) Held that, under section 37 of the Poor Law Act, deduction is to be given for the average expense of actual repairs only; (2) Held that one ratepayer is not entitled to deduction on the ground that too large deductions have been allowed to other ratepayers; (3) Circumstances in which held that a railway company was entitled to deductions to the extent of 28.60 per cent.

The following extract from the Lord Ordinary's note explains the nature of the different points decided:—

It was objected by the respondent, the poor-law collector, that in striking ‘the probable annual average’ of repairs and other expenses, the reporter had gone wrong in taking any other than the years preceding the year of valuation, because it was only these years which could be possibly taken into view by the Poor Law Board when making their estimate for the particular year. The reporter has taken an average including five years preceding. and five subsequent. Now it is quite true that it is. only previous years that could be absolutely known Page: 114 ↓

Counsel for the Suspenders—The Solicitor-General and Mr Mackenzie . Agents— Messrs Hill , Reid, & Drummond , W.S.

Counsel for the Respondent— Mr Patton and Mr W. M. Thomson . Agent— Mr Wm. Burness , S.S.C.