East Ayrshire Council v. Robertson+ & Anor

The Sheriff Principal having resumed consideration of the appeal refuses the motion for the second defender (no 7/1 of process) to allow her appeal against the Sheriff's interlocutor of 9 March 2005 to be heard although late; finds the second defender liable to the pursuers in the expenses of the motion before the Sheriff Principal; allows an account thereof to be given in and remits same when lodged to the Auditor of Court to tax and to report.

This is a motion on behalf of the second defender moving me to exercise my dispensing power to allow her appeal against the Sheriff's interlocutor of 9 March 2005 granting decree to be heard although late. It was accepted that this was an appeal against an extracted interlocutor.

The second defender did not instruct her current solicitors until 9 December 2005 .

On 23 September 2005 sheriff officers reported to the pursuers that they had effected service of petitions and warrants for sequestration separately upon the first and second defenders. After sundry procedure, both sequestrations were dismissed in Ayr Sheriff Court on 23 November 2005 with an award of expenses in favour of the pursuers as petitioners in the sequestration.

Certain correspondence (no 5/3 and 5/4 of process) took place between Messrs Barretts, Solicitors, Kilmarnock on behalf of the first and second defenders and the pursuers on 22 November 2005 . These letters were produced. After the second defender's current solicitors had been instructed on 9 December 2005 the pursuers wrote to them on 19 January 2006 . These solicitors replied on 23 February 2006 and the pursuers wrote further the second defender's solicitors on 6 March 2006 . These letters are 6/1, 6/2 and 6/3 of process.