Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Sequel of the case reported ante, p. 318, which see. Certain trustees raised a process of multiplepoinding for ascertaining the order of preference among various parties claiming right to the share of trust-funds belonging to one of the beneficiaries under the trust. William Turton Beilby was holder of a bond for £2000 granted by that beneficiary, together with an assignation of his share in the trust-estate, in security; and the assignation had been duly intimated. The bond contained the usual obligation in name of penalty.

An interlocutor was pronounced, fixing Beilby's place in the ranking as to the sum in his bond, but a question remained as to the order of ranking him for the expenses he had incurred, some part of which was said to have been unnecessary and unreasonable. The Lord Ordinary having found, that, in ranking for his expenses, he must be postponed to other claimants, to whom he was preferable for the principal sum in his bond, he presented a reclaiming note. The Court expressed a decided and unanimous opinion, that, for all necessary and reasonable expenses incurred by him, he must be ranked, under the penalty in his bond, in the same order of preference as for the principal sum itself. But, as the fact, how far the expenses were justifiable, was not sufficiently expiscated, their Lordships recalled the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor, and remitted to have this ascertained, and to proceed, quoad ultra, as should be just.