Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Scottish Court of Session Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Robertson v. Meikle and Another [1890] ScotLR 28_18 (15 July 1890)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1890/28SLR0018.html
Cite as: [1890] ScotLR 28_18, [1890] SLR 28_18
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
SCOTTISH_SLR_Court_of_Session
Page: 18↓
Court of Session Outer House.
[
v.
Facts:
A pursuer having raised an action of reduction in ordinary form afterwards applied for admission to the poor's roll. The reporters reported that there was not a probabilis causa. He then proposed to proceed in ordinary form. Held that he must find caution for expenses.
On 29th August 1889 William Robertson, cab-driver, Edinburgh, raised an action of reduction against Robert Meikle, dairyman, Corstorphine, and another.
Issues for trial by jury were approved of on 22nd November 1889, and the trial ordered to proceed on 25th February 1890.
A few days before the date fixed for trial the pursuer's agent, Mr Thomas M'Naught,S.S.C., intimated that he no longer acted for the pursuer in the action, and on 19th February 1890 the Lord Ordinary discharged the order for trial, the pursuer having intimated his intention of seeking the benefit of the poor's roll.
Nothing having been done by the pursuer, the defenders on 5th March 1890 gave notice for trial at the close of the Winter Session, and on 13th March 1890 their Lordships of the Second Division discharged the notice of trial in respect of a statement on behalf of the pursuer that he was in course of making application for the benefit of the poor's roll. In June 1890 their Lordships remitted the pursuer's application to the probabilis causa reporters, and on 4th July 1890 they reported that there was no probable cause. Their Lordships remitted the case to Lord Wellwood for further procedure.
On the case coming before Lord Wellwood, the agent for the pursuer intimated through counsel that he again appeared for his client, and asked for a day to be fixed for jury trial.
Counsel for the defenders asked his Lordship to ordain the pursuer to find caution for expenses with certification. Authorities— Hunter v. Clark, 1 R. 1154; Thom v. Andrew, 15 R. 782 ( per Lord Young); Ritchie v. Young, 8 R. 748; Clarke v. Muller, 11 R. 418.
The pursuer relied on the judgment of Lord Lee in the reported case of Thomson v. North British Railway Company, July 14, 1882, 9 R. 1102.
Page: 19↓
The Lord Ordinary ordained the pursuer to find caution for expenses with certification.
Counsel for the Pursuer— John Wilson. Agent— Thomas M'Naught, S.S.C.
Counsel for the Defenders— Vary Campbell— Cosens. Agents— Wylie, Robertson, & Rankin, W.S.