RUNDEL BRIDGES and RUNDEL v LADY MONTGOMERIE (Court of Session)

When the case came back to the Court of Session, interest on the principal sums for which Lady Montgomerie was found liable, having been claimed and refused, it was—

The engagement to contribute towards the payment of Lord Montgomerie's debts was not an unqualified engagement. It proceeded upon calculations embodied in the deeds, and which were believed by all parties to be accurate. It was with express reference to these calculations, and a reliance on their accuracy, that Lady Montgomerie entered into any engagement at all. As these calculations formed the inductive cause of the deeds which were afterwards executed, they must be held in sound construction to explain and control any general obligatory expression afterwards occurring in these deeds.

It is not true that interest has been paid upon the debts of the creditors now claiming. No interest has been paid upon these debts after the date of Lord Montgomerie's death; and down to that period interest was due; it formed part of the debt due by Lord Montgomerie at that date. Interest was paid upon some of the Scotch debts; but these were in particular circumstances, and where other parties were interposed as cautioners.

The Lord Ordinary found, ‘That the claimants are entitled to be ranked upon the fund in medio for the interest due to them upon such debts as were constituted by bonds or bills; but that the claimants, who are all English creditors, are not entitled to interest upon the debts which were due to them upon open accounts, which, it is admitted, do not bear interest by the law of England.’ His Lordship also found Lady Montgomerie liable in expenses from the date of the judgment of the House of Lords.

The Court , accordingly, adhered to the interlocutor, except as to expenses, which their Lordships found due to neither party.