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.
Under this judgment, a charge on letters of horning having been given to Paterson to enter to the chargers' service, he presented a bill of suspension, and pleaded —
Supposing the agreement to have been binding, the breach of such an agreement for the services, not of an ordinary or menial servant, but of a superior artist or mechanic, exposes him at the utmost to a claim of damages, and not to a summary application for his imprisonment.
The suspender having entered into an agreement with the chargers, he was bound specially to implement that agreement; and, failing his doing so, the sheriff had full power to ordain him to implement, in terms of the decree now complained of; and he is in no different situation from an ordinary workman or artizan.
The Lord Ordinary sustained the reasons of suspension; ‘suspended the letters simpliciter; and decerned; reserving to the chargers to proceed in their action of damages before the inferior court, if so advised,’ &c.
Lord Balgray said—That the case was one of great importance; but, in his opinion, the Lord Ordinary had not put the matter on its proper footing, and there appeared to be some inconsistency in the interlocutor. If it was the opinion of his Lordship that the writings founded on constituted a binding obligation, there ought to have been an express finding to this effect. On the other hand, if it was not so, there could be no room for the reservation of damages.
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.