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 facts and pleas which arose in this case will be found clearly stated in the following note added by the Lord Ordinary to his interlocutor of the 9th July 1836:
In regard to the objection taken in the additional plea for the advocator, that Thomas Blair, whose name appears in the lease of 1804 as a joint tenant, is not a party to the summary application, it is to be observed that no such objection ever was made in the inferior court; and the Lord Ordinary does not think that at this late stage of the procedure it can be listened to, particularly when the advocator is rendered perfectly safe by Thomas Blair's renunciation of all interest in the matter.’
The Lord Ordinary, after repelling the objection to the competency of the advocation, on the 1st June 1836, ( F. C. vol. xi. p. 716,) pronounced an interlocutor, by which he ‘repels the reasons of advocation, remits the cause simpliciter to the Sheriff of Forfarshire, and decerns: finds the advocator liable in expenses in this Court,’ &c.
The Court then pronounced a unanimous judgment, adhering to the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor, and awarding additional expenses to the defender.
Lord Ordinary, Fullerton. Act. Sol.-Gen. (Rutherfurd,) Coventry. Alt. Dean of Fac. (Hope,) Neaves. J. F. Gordon, W. S. and Macintosh & Ducat, W. S. Agents. B. Clerk.
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.