Page: 600↓
House of Lords.
Appeal Committee.
(Before
v.
( Ante, November 1, 1902, 40 S.L.R. 50.)
Subject_Appeal to House of Lords — Competency — Appeal on Question of Expenses only.
Facts:
An appeal to the House of Lords on the question of expenses only is not competent.
This case is reported ante ut supra.
The Caledonian Railway Company (defenders and appellants) appealed to the House of Lords, but upon the question of expenses only.
The pursuer and respondent objected to the competency of the appeal, in respect that it was taken upon the question of expenses only, and cited Macqueen's Practice of the House of Lords, p. 94; Denison & Scott's House of Lords Appeal Practice, p. 67; Tod v. Tod (1827), 2 W. & S. 542; Horne v. Pringle (1840), 8 Cl. & F. 264; and Court of Session (Scotland) Act 1825 (6 Geo. IV. c. 120) (Judicature Act), sec. 40.
The Appeal Committee held that the appeal, being on the question of expenses only, was incompetent, and dismissed the appeal with five guineas costs.
Solicitors: Agents for the Pursuer and Respondent— A. & W. Beveridge, Westminster—Smith & Watt, W.S., Edinburgh.
Agents for the Defenders and Appellants— Grahames, Currey, & Spens, Westminster— Hope, Todd, & Kirk, W.S., Edinburgh— H. B. Neave, Glasgow.
- Case
- [1903] UKHL 600
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
AI summary not yet generated for this case.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.