Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Sequel of the case reported ante, XII. p. 50 and 411. The question at issue arose in a reduction of a decree which Charles M'Caul and Others had obtained against Wood the pursuer, and it resolved into the matter of fact, whether a certain sum of £7, for rent, was or was not included in a bill for £32, 6s. 1d., which had been granted by Wood to the defenders.

The Lord Ordinary, proceeding in part on the assumption that a note in process was holograph of the pursuer, which stated the fact to be that the £7 was a distinct sum from the contents of the bill, assoilzied from the reduction. Under a reclaiming note, the defenders admitted that the document was not holograph of the pursuer, and the Court, “before answer, allowed the defenders a proof, that the rent in the decree sought to be reduced made no part of the alleged state prepared when the bill for £32, 6s. 1d. was granted, and to the pursuer a conjunct probation.” On advising which the Court adhered to the interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary.