BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Barclay v The Earl of Cassils. [1631] 1 Brn 70 (13 January 1631) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1631/Brn010070-0142.html Cite as: [1631] 1 Brn 70 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
[1631] 1 Brn 70
Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by SIR ALEXANDER GIBSON, OF DURIE.
Date: Barclay
v.
The Earl of Cassils
13 January 1631 Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In this cause, witnesses being ordained to be examined, ex officio, as is noted, 21st December 1630, and a commission being granted to examine Alexander Barclay's wife, and ordained to be reported at a day assigned to that effect;—the defender being urged by the pursuer, at that day, to produce the report: and he alleging that he could not be compelled to produce the same, seeing the commission was granted in his favour, and he had either power, as he pleased, to use and execute the commission, or to desert the same; or, if he pleased, albeit it
was used, he could not be compelled to produce the report, but might keep it up, and the pursuer might take all advantage thereby which he might in law, for furtherance of his process, seeing he was content that process should be granted in the cause, without respect thereto:—The Lords, nevertheless, found, that, seeing the commission was granted, ex officio, to try the matter controverted, that thereby the Lords might be informed, that the party ought to produce the report, and that he ought not to keep up the same. Page 552.
The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting
