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 £5, 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 >> Aikman v. Aikman [1867] ScotLR 3_221_1 (14 February 1867) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1867/03SLR0221_1.html Cite as: [1867] SLR 3_221_1, [1867] ScotLR 3_221_1 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 221↓
Objection to the competency of a reponing note against a judgment default in not lodging issues, that the interlocutor ordering the issues was not prefixed, repelled; but observed that the omission was an irregularity.
This was a reclaiming note against an interlocutor assoilzieing the defenders “in respect of the failure of the pursuer to lodge an issue or issues in terms of the preceding interlocutor of 24th January last.”
Marshall, for the defenders, objected to the competency that the interlocutor of 24th January was not prefixed to the note as well as the interlocutor assoilzieing the defenders, as required by Act of Sederunt, 11th July 1828, sec. 110.
Pattison, for the pursuer, replied that what was desiderated by the defenders was not required by the Act of Sederunt; at all events, the want of it did not amount to incompetency.
The
Page: 222↓
The Court remitted to repone on payment of expenses.
Solicitors: Agent for Pursuer— William Mackersy, W.S.
Agents for Defenders— Mackenzie, Innes, & Logan, W.S.
