Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Subject_1Master and Servant
Subject_2Contract
Subject_3Damages for Wrongous Dismissal.
Facts:

George Todd, brickmaker, sued Wm. Arrol & Co. engineers and contractors, Glasgow, for £104, 14s. ld. in name of damages for breach of contract. The defenders were contractors for the erection of the Forth Bridge at Queensferry, and the pursuer averred that they had engaged him for a year from 23d February 1880 at a salary of £150, and an additional commission on the output of bricks, to be manager of their brickwork at Inverkeithing in connection with the said contract. The defenders averred that his engagement was as a weekly servant, at a wage of £3 per week and the said commission. The pursuer worked at the brickwork until 14th August, when the defenders intimated to him that the undertaking had been abandoned, and that his services would no longer be required. He claimed damages for wrongous dismissal, the amount sued for consisting of £75 for the remaining half-year's salary of his alleged term of engagement, and a sum of £29 odd as the estimated amount of commission which would probably have become due and payable to him during that period. Proof was led, from which it appeared that the pursuer's engagement was made at an interview between him and Mr Arrol on 19th February, as to the terms of which the parties were at variance. A letter was produced, written by pursuer to defenders' firm on 20th February in the following terms:—“Referring to my conversation of yesterday with your Mr Wm. Arrol, I hereby offer for twelve months, from Monday 23d current, to take the management of the brickworks started by you at Inverkeithing . . and that at a salary of £150 … payable either monthly or, at your option, shorter periods, with the addition of a premium of ld. per thousand on the output, payable quarterly… . Your acceptance of this per return will oblige your obedient servant, George Todd.” No acceptance was received. During the pursuer's stay at Inverkeithjug he received £3 per week from Stewart, the defenders' cashier. The Sheriff-Substitute ( Lees) after proof led, found the yearly engagement proved, and decerned in pursuer's favour for £90 of damages. The defenders appealed to the Court of Session, and the Lords affirmed the judgment of the Sheriff-Substitute.