Scottish Court of Session Decisions

This was an objection to the auditor's report. He had allowed a charge of £54, 2s. to the pursuers' agent for proceeding to London and attending the examination of a witness for the defenders, whose evidence was allowed by the Court to be taken to lie in retentis. The examination lasted for four days. It was objected for the defenders that it was unnecessary for the Edinburgh agent to attend the examination, and that a London agent should have been employed. The defenders founded in support of their objection in the case of Armstrong's Trustees ( 12 S. 510) and Lumsden v. Hamilton ( 7 D. 300). It appeared that the Edinburgh agent for the defenders had also gone to London to attend the examination,

The Court repelled the objection.

The ordinary rule undoubtedly was that a party was not entitled as against his opponent to the expense of such a charge as was objected to. It lay upon the pursuers to justify the charge. In this case the importance and propriety of having an Edinburgh agent was shown by what the defenders had themselves done; and it also appeared from the nature of the examination of the witness, who was a witness for the defenders, that the presence of the Edinburgh agent for the pursuers was necessary.