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.
The Lord Ordinary verbally reported the question, whether a petition and complaint against a trustee on a sequestrated estate, concluding for payment of certain dividends, and for penal interest, which had been remitted to his Lordship to prepare the cause, and thereafter to do as he should see just, and in which the date of the last deliverance was 17 November 1830, was to be held as asleep.
The Court was unanimously of opinion, that, being an Inner-House process, the petition and complaint could not be in the predicament of a process asleep.
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.