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 >> Donnachie v. Thom [1892] ScotLR 30_201 (15 December 1892) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1892/30SLR0201.html Cite as: [1892] SLR 30_201, [1892] ScotLR 30_201 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 201↓
[Sheriff of Lanarkshire.
The pursuer in an action of damages for personal injury having appealed under the 40th section of the Judicature Act for jury trial, the Court refused, on the motion of the defender, to remit the cause back to the Sheriff for proof, and ordered issues to be lodged, although the amount in dispute between the parties was trifling.
James Donnachie sued James Thom in the Sheriff Court at Glasgow for payment of £50 as damages for injuries sustained by his pupil child Elizabeth, who had been run over by a horse and gig driven by the defender.
The defender admitted liability for the injuries sustained by the child, and tendered £15, with the expenses of process, in reparation thereof, subject to the pursuer proving that the child in question was his lawful issue.
Prior to the raising of the action the pursuer had offered to take £25, besides medical and legal expenses.
The Sheriff-Substitute having allowed a proof on the question of damages, the pursuer appealed to the First Division, and moved the Court to order issues to be lodged.
The defender objected that, looking to the smallness of the sum in dispute, the case was unfitted for jury trial, and moved the Court to remit back to the Sheriff for proof.
The pursuer submitted that the course proposed by the defender was not in accordance with the practice of the Court in the case of actions of damages for personal injuries.
The Court, in respect of the nature of the action, refused the defender's motion and ordered issues.
Counsel for the Pursuer— Christie. Agents— Simpson & Marwick, W.S.
Counsel for the Defender— Ure. Agents— Webster, Will, & Ritchie, W.S.
