Ininmonth v. British Aluminium Co., Ltd

George Ogilvie Kininmonth, Gedsmiln, in the parish of Burntisland and county of Fife, complainer , brought a note of suspension and interdict against The British Aluminium Company, Limited, London, respondents ( reclaimers ), for interdict against the respondents entering on any portion of certain farm lands tenanted by him.

The complainer averred that the landlord had sold a portion of the lands to the respondents without having given to the complainer definite and sufficient notice that he intended to resume them; and pleaded, inter alia —“(3) Interdict should be granted in respect ( a ) that no valid notice of resumption has been given to the complainer; ( b ) that the said subjects cannot be resumed until after the expiry of a reasonable period of notice.”

The respondents pleaded, inter alia —“(1) The complainer's averments being irrelevant, interdict should be refused.

The lease reserved to the landlord “the right to sell or resume possession of any part or parts of the lands hereby let at any time, … the tenant to receive a proportionate deduction from his rent and surface damage to crops as, failing agreement, the same may be fixed by arbiters mutually chosen.” It contained no provision with regard to notice to the tenant by the landlord of his intention to resume.

On 31st January 1914 the Lord Ordinary on the Bills ( Anderson ) passed the note, and on 13th May 1914 the Lord Ordinary ( Cullen ), before whom the case had come to depend, allowed a proof before answer.