In a claim for a sum below L. 12, a bill of advocation cannot be received, even to the effect of remitting with instructions.See No 18.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In a question between these parties, respecting the reparation of some houses upon a farm, the Judge Ordinary having repelled the defender's plea against his being bound to repair the houses, which the pursuer, in obedience to an order of Court, estimated at L. 6: 19: 11 Sterling, the defender applied to this Court for an advocation of the cause, or a remit, with instructions to assoilzie him from the article in question. “And the Lord Ordinary, officiating on the bills, having refused the bill, hut remitted to the Sheriff, with this instruction, that he assoilzie the complainer from the pursuer's claim, respecting the reparation of the houses;” pursuer reclaimed, insisting that the bill, and procedure thereon, was incompetent, the article disputed being only L. 6: 19: 11 Sterling. The bill of advocation respected no other point in the process; and, by 20th Geo. II. c.43. no cause can be advocated for a sum below L. 12: And the practice, in some cases, of remits upon bills of advocation, in causes for smaller sums, was found to be erroneous in a case decided 24th November 1767, Auld and Company against Wilson*.
‘The Court remitted to the Lord Ordinary to refuse the bill of advocation, as incompetent.’
Act. G. Clerk.Alt. Tytler.Clerk, Tait.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 20. Wallace, No 177. p. 94.
