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.
Subject_1 Obligation Subject_2 Clause Subject_3 Option Subject_4 Waiver. Facts: Circumstances in which held (aff. Lord Jerviswoode) that a party who had under an obligation an option which he might exercise “upon the dissolution” of a company of which he was a partner, had failed timeously to exercise it.
Lord Curriehill concurred. He was of opinion that the defender had acted throughout with great fairness and liberality. He thought that after 23d January the option was at an end, but was very clear that after 28th January it was. His Lordship also expressed doubt as to whether even on 2d March the option had been validly exercised. Under the obligation he was, on declaring his option, to pay money, whereas when he did so he asked some.
Counsel for Pursuer— Mr Fraser and Mr MacLean . Agent— Mr John Ross , S.S.C.
Counsel for Defender— Mr Clark and Mr Asher . Agents— Messrs Maconochie & Hare , W.S.
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.