BANK OF SCOTLAND v. IAN MITCHELL

The Sheriff, having resumed consideration of the cause, refuses to grant a warrant for citation on the foregoing writ.

I was surprised to have my attention drawn by the Sheriff Clerk in Dundee to a communication from a firm of solicitors in Stratford-upon-Avon enclosing an Initial Writ at the instance of the Bank of Scotland against Ian Mitchell, who is alleged to owe the potential pursuers money and who resides within this court's territorial jurisdiction, together a cheque from those English solicitors in payment of the fee for the warrant, all accompanied by a letter which read, inter alia:-

"We enclose herewith the Initial Writ and should be obliged if you would issue a Warrant for service. Our cheque is enclosed herewith in respect of the dues of Warrant and we should be grateful if you would return the Writ and Warrant to our Scottish Agents, Maclay Murray and Spens, as indicated on the Writ itself."

The Writ, which contained pleadings germane to the recovery of a credit card debt, purported to be signed by someone whose signature I could not make out, but the designation was the firm name and address of Messrs. Maclay, Murray & Spens, Solicitors, Glasgow. I considered that these circumstances called for some explanation, standing the provisions of the Solcitors (Scotland)Act, 1980, as amended, and the European Communities (Lawyer's Practice)(Scotland) Regulations, 2000.

I pause simply to draw attention to the fact that nowhere in this narration of the practice adopted was the word "assignation" mentioned. It therefore appeared to me that Messrs. Maclay, Murray and Spens were acting, insofar as they were acting at all, as the agents of the agents of the agents of the pursuers, hardly a satisfactory relationship between solicitor and client for the proper conduct of litigation.