Scottish Court of Session Decisions

In this case the Court lately refused a motion by the defenders to fix the trial for the Christmas sittings, and also a motion by the pursuer to fix the trial to take place within a certain fixed time after the decision of the appeal to the House of Lords in the similar case of Addie v. The Bank. The pursuer has given a notice of trial for the Christmas sittings, which he has it in his power to countermand; but he was afraid that if he did so the defenders might move for the dismissal of the action under the Act of Sederunt in 1841, in respect of his failure to proceed to trial within twelve months after 8th March last, when the new trial was allowed. He therefore now moved the Court to discharge the notice of trial for Christmas, and appoint the trial to take place at the sittings next July. The defenders refused to consent to the motion; but their counsel stated that after what had on previous occasions fallen from the Court, it would not have occurred to them to make the motion which the pursuer dreaded. The Court refused the motion, the Lord President observing—“If we are asked before the 8th March to fix a time for the trial, I don't think the pursuer will be within the Act of Sederunt.”