Scottish Court of Session Decisions

Lord Adam—We have here a note of objections by George Whyte to the Auditor's report on his account of expenses in a petition for the sequestration of his estates. Whyte conducted his own case, and being successful was found entitled to expenses. He lodged an account of these expenses, amounting in all to £55, 6s. 4d., of which sum the Auditor has taxed off £44, 12s. 6d., and has added on a small sum of £1, 7s. 8d., bringing out a balance of £43, 4s. 10d., and deducting that from the amount of the account leaves a sum of £12, 1s. 6d. due to Whyte.

In his report the Auditor explains the principle upon which he has proceeded—[ His Lordship here read the passage in the report quoted above].

Mr Whyte's objection practically comes to this—He says that he is entitled to all of what he calls outlays and other charges, his railway fares and other expenses in coming to Edinburgh from Aberdeen and from London, his personal expenses while in Edinburgh during the discussions, at the rate of £1, 11s. 6d. per day, and a sum of 3 guineas a day for the time when he was detained from business in consequence of his attendance in the Court.

Now, for myself, I should require further consideration before I could hold that when a person conducts his own case he is entitled to any remuneration at all for his trouble in the matter. If he is entitled to anything in name of outlay, I think it must be of the most moderate description, but for a party who is living at a distance to come here each time the case is in the roll and conduct his own case personally, and then charge substantial sums for outlay, personal expenses, and loss of time, is absurd. The Auditor has allowed about £12 as being a reasonable allowance to Mr Whyte. As I have said, I doubt whether anything at all should be allowed, but we cannot consider that from the way in which the matter comes before the Court, the other party not having lodged a note of objections. All we can do is to repel Mr Whyte's objections, which I am of opinion we ought to do.

Lord M'Laren—I agree that a person who conducts his own case is not entitled to remuneration for trouble and loss of time incurred in consequence of his having elected to attend the Court personally. I am therefore not prepared to affirm the principle on which the Auditor appears to proceed.

Nor as at present advised am I prepared to allow a person conducting his own case anything for his personal expenses, railway fares, hotel bills, and so on.

But as no objection is taken by the other party to the Auditor's report, we may give decree for the sum which the Auditor has allowed.

Lord Kyllachy—I agree that a litigant conducting his own case is not entitled to any compensation for time and trouble. I participate in your Lordship's doubt whether such litigant is entitled to more than his judicial outlays—that is to say, his outlays in connection with the fees of Court, and outlays of that description.

But, in any case, I am clear that such litigant is not entitled to more than a reasonable allowance for his outlays, judicial and extrajudicial. And it seems to me that in the whole circumstances of this case the sum here allowed by the Auditor fairly represents such reasonable allowance.

The Lord President and Lord Kinnear were absent.