Page: 962↓
Subject_Process — Record. —
Where the record has not been closed, and there has been no discussion, it is competent to reclaim against a judgment pronounced in respect of non-appearance without appending any record to the note, though the condescendence and answers had been revised, and the Lord Ordinary bed made avizandum with a view to close the record before the interlocutor was pronounced.
In an action at the instance of Wilson against Stevenson, the Lord Ordinary, “no appearance being made for the defender, repelled the defences,” &c. with expenses, and afterwards his Lordship approved of the auditor's report, and decerned. Stevenson reclaimed, and craved a remit to the Lord Ordinary to repone him on paying such expenses as should seem reasonable. Wilson objected to the competency of the note that no record was appended, though a revised condescendence and answers had been made up, and the Lord Ordinary had made avizandum with a view to close the record before the interlocutors under review had been pronounced. Stevenson answered that no record had been closed, and the interlocutors were pronounced without any discussion, it was therefore unnecessary to print the record, and the only matter for discussion was the question of expenses.
The other Judges concurred and
The Court gave judgment accordingly.
Solicitors: T. Paul, W.S.— R. Laidlaw W.S.—Agents.