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.
Until lately, this port had remained in its natural state, having no quay or pier, nor any accommodation for mooring vessels, except a few stakes fixed in the open harbour.
A few years since, Mr Christie of Durie let the shore and anchorage-dues to the other pursuers, who have manufacturing establishments in the vicinity of the town of Leven, for 19 years, at the rent of L.42 a-year for the last 14 years, no rent being payable for the first five years of the lease, in consideration of the engagement by the lessees to build a quay, and make other improvements on the harbour.
The lessees having completed these improvements, proceeded, in virtue of powers conferred by the lease, to frame a new table of harbour-dues, increasing them on some articles, and diminishing them on others, while duties were laid on certain commodities which were not included in the old table.
The pursuers' statement, which they offered to prove, was not in all points acquiesced in; but it is unnecessary to detail the defender's counter averments.
The Lord Ordinary appointed the parties to prepare cases ‘upon the question of the power of the pursuers to raise the dues of the harbour, under the circumstances of this case, without the authority of Parliament.’
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.