Skip to Search Facets Skip to Results
Full Search Search Help

Results: 57

  • Harvey v Farquhar

    22 Feb 1872 LR 2 ScDiv 192, HL(Sc)

    DIVORCE — Consequent Forfeiture of Donatio propter Nuptias — Tocher.
    DIVORCE — Divorce for desertion.
    DIVORCE — Divorce for adultery.
    DIVORCE — Tocher.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR:— My Lords, in this case the Appellant, Mr. Harvey, seeks at your Lordships' hands the reversal of certain interlocutors which have been pronounced by the Lord Ordinary and the Court of Session in Scotland with reference to certain funds which were settled by a contract which he made upon his marriage with Miss Hunter. The marriage appears to have been an unhappy one, inasmuch as not very long after it had been contracted, it was dissolved by a sentence of divorce, pronounced in the proper Court, on account of Mr. Harvey's adultery. It is said that the

  • Catton v Mackenzie

    11 Mar 1872 LR 2 ScDiv 202, HL(Sc)

    ADMINISTRATION OF ESTATES — Strict entail — Relaxation of Fetters for the Benefit of Younger Children.

  • Caledonian Railway Co v Greenock and Wemyss Bay Railway Co

    24 Mar 1874 LR 2 ScDiv 347, HL(Sc)

    ARBITRATION — Compulsory reference to arbitration.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR:— My Lords, the question in this case is, whether the Respondents were well founded in their first plea, which alleged that the action brought against them was excluded by clause 18 of the agreement. That agreement was entered into with the Caledonian Railway Company, then an incorporated company. The contractors on the other part were the promoters of the Greenock and Wemyss Bay Railway, all, or some of them, becoming afterwards its directors. The agreement would not, without more, have been binding on the Greenock and Wemyss Bay Railway Company, when incorporated; and therefore it was scheduled

  • Lord Advocate v Clyde Steam Navigation Co Et Al

    11 Mar 1875 LR 2 ScDiv 409, HL(Sc)

    SHIPPING — 17 & 18 vict. c. 104 — Ship Measurement

  • Cuno v Cuno

    13 May 1873 LR 2 ScDiv 300, HL(E)

    MARRIAGE — Nullity of marriage — Impotence
    PRACTICE — Delay in applying to the court.
    PRACTICE — Strictness of the court in interposing.

  • Fraser v Crawford et al

    17 Jun 1870 LR 2 ScDiv 42, HL(Sc)

    PRACTICE — Costly litigation — Expressions of Regret.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR:— My Lords, in this case complaint is made of a decision pronounced by the Court of Session sustaining defences to an action brought by the Appellant to reduce and set aside an award. Having well considered the case, I think, my Lords, that the interlocutor complained of ought to be affirmed, and the appeal dismissed with costs. LORD CHELMSFORD: — The value of the subject matter in litigation between these parties is the sum of £80, to which the Respondent claims to be entitled. And it really is lamentable to think of the enormous expense which has

  • Smith Cuninghame v Anstruther

    25 Apr 1872 LR 2 ScDiv 223, HL(Sc)

    POWER OF APPOINTMENT — A father's power of appointment under his marriage settlement.
    POWER — A power may be executed without any express reference to it.
    APPOINTMENT — Appointments pro tanto.
    PRACTICE — Special judgment.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR:— My Lords, the question in this case is as to the legal effect to be given to the original marriage settlement of 1828, — to the two settlements executed on the marriages of Mrs. Cuninghame and Mrs. Mercer respectively, — and to the £20,000 made over to Miss Lucy Anstruther, for which she gave her discharge. The ultimate conclusion come to in Mrs. Cuninghame's case by the majority of the learned Judges below was, that the £5000 provided in her settlement, coupled with the release or discharge which she gave, operated as a complete extinguishment of her

  • Couston, Thomson, & Co, Wine Merchants In Leith v Chapman, Auctioneer In Edinburgh

    19 Jul 1872 LR 2 ScDiv 250, HL(Sc)

    SALE OF GOODS — Sale by Sample — Privileges and Obligations of the Purchaser.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR:— My Lords, it is clear in this case that the purchase of each lot was a distinct contract. The question is as to lots 24 and 51, and the contest of the Appellants is, that the sale having been by sample, these lots were not conformable to the sample. The sale took place on the 19th of March, and the delivery was to have been immediate, but did not take place until early in April. Sold as claret of fine quality and sufficiently high price, the Appellants sent a sample of it to a Mr. Cooper, of

  • Mordaunt v Moncreiffe

    15 May 1874 LR 2 ScDiv 374, HL(E)

    Subsequent citations: 1.
    DIVORCE — Divorce against a wife — Her Insanity no Bar.
    DIVORCE — Divorce on behalf of an insane husband or wife.
    DIVORCE — Opinions of the consulted judges as to divorce in cases of insanity.
    CRIME — Adultery — Whether a crime

  • Smeaton v The Magistrates Of St Andrews

    20 Mar 1871 LR 2 ScDiv 107, HL(Sc)

    PUBLIC AUTHORITY — Statutory improvements commissioners — How far bound by their Contracts.
    STATUTE — Statutory notices.
    THE LORD CHANCELLOR, after carefully examining the pleadings and the evidence, made the following remarks: My Lords, the duty of the Commissioners involves something more than the resolution of a mere engineering problem. Their judgment is to be exercised in the best manner for the general interests of the town. Among other things, they have to determine the question of expense, and the expediency of escaping heavy claims of damages. I apprehend, therefore, that they had a perfect right to enter into this negotiation with Mr. Smeaton. It is said that the Commissioners are a public body, acting in a

We use cookies on this website, you can read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. To use website as intended please Accept Cookies