Page: 170↓
An action of damages at the instance of one mineral lessee against another, on the ground of encroachment on coal seams, held relevant, although the pursuer had renounced his lease.
In this case, which is an action of damages at the instance of Robert Bell, coalmaster at Wishaw, against the defenders, who were tenants of Mr Houldsworth, of Coltness, on the ground of encroachment on two coal seams which the pursuer leased from Lord Belhaven, the Court to-day, affirming a judgment of Lard Barcaple, held the action relevant. It was alleged by the defenders that the pursuer had executed a renunciation of his lease, and it was contended that he had no interest to maintain the action; but the Court held that a renunciation of the lease did not imply renunciation of claims of damages arising during the subsistence of the lease. The Lord Justice. Clerk took occasion to observe, in answer to an argument maintained for the defenders, that according to the law of Scotland, a person had a right of action wherever he alleged a legal wrong, and that he, in consequence of aid wrong, had sustained damage. The amount of damages to which he might be found entitled did not in any was affect the relevancy of the action.
Counsel for pursuer— Mr Young and Mr Gifford. Agents— Tods, Murray, & Jamieson, W.S.
Counsel for Defenders— Mr Thomson. Agent— Alexander Morison, S.S.C.