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.
L.182:10:8, due 1st September 1832. ‘I am,’ &c.: That having received no answer, the said Thomas Heath again wrote the said Patrick Alexander Walker, as follows: London, 4 th September 1832.—Sir, I had the pleasure to address you on the 10th ultimo, advising that I held bills for
It being admitted that the pursuer, Thomas Heath, is a creditor of Patrick Alexander Walker, and that the pursuer, Charles Pearson, is trustee appointed by the said Patrick Alexander Walker for his creditors and himself:
It being also admitted, that on the 3d day of September 1832, the defender obtained from the said Patrick Alexander Walker the heritable bond, No. 13. of process, sought to be reduced, and the instrument of sasine following thereon, dated the 8th, and recorded in the particular register of sasines for the shire of Fife, the 10th days of the said month, also sought to be reduced:
Whether, by undue or fraudulent concealment, or undue or fraudulent misrepresentation, the defender obtained a preference over the pursuers, or one or other of them, by means of the said bond and infeftment?
The case of each party rested in substance on the correspondence above mentioned entirely, with the exception of the examination of one or two witnesses, as to the value of the property.
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.