Sponsiones ludicrĉ. - Game Debt. - Premium for procuring a Wife. - Private Lotteries.
Samuel Wordsworth v. John Pettigrew
Date: 15 May 1799 Case No. No 69.
Wagers are not actionable.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Samuel Wordsworth obtained decree in absence against John Pettigrew for L. 5 Sterling, as the amount of a wager, that a particular mare would trot 17 miles within an hour.
In a suspension, Pettigrew, besides denying that he had taken the bet, contended that action does not lie for claims of this sort.
The Court, upon a verbal report by Lord Probationer Bannatyne, were unanimously of this opinion. This was not founded on the statutes against gaming, but on common law. Courts of Justice (it was observed) were instituted to enforce the rights of parties arising from serious transactions, and can pay no regard sponsionibus ludicris; as to money gained or lost, on which melior est conditio possidentis; 26th January 1787, Bruce against Ross, No 67. p. 9523. affirmed on appeal.
