BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Grierson v. Mitchell [1911] ScotLR 94 (24 November 1911)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1911/49SLR0094.html
Cite as: [1911] SLR 94, [1911] ScotLR 94

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


SCOTTISH_SLR_Court_of_Session

Page: 94

Court of Session Inner House Second Division.

Friday, November 24. 1911.

[ Lord Skerrington, Ordinary.

49 SLR 94

Grierson

v.

Mitchell.

Subject_1Process
Subject_2Reclaiming Note
Subject_3Boxing of Prints
Subject_4Correspondence not in Process.
Facts:

Only such documents as are in process may be printed and boxed to the Inner House on a reclaiming note. A party wishing to found in the Inner House on a document not lodged in

Page: 95

process must move the Court for leave to lodge it before printing it.

Headnote:

Mrs Alice Stanley Peake or Grierson reclaimed against an interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary (Skerrington) dismissing an action of damages at her instance against Charles Ernest Mitchell. In the Inner House prints were boxed to the Court containing letters between the agents which had not been lodged in process.

In his opinion disposing of the case Lord Salvesen observed—In the Inner House various prints were boxed to the Court containing some correspondence which had passed between the agents for the parties, partly before and partly after the action was raised. It appeared in the end that none of the correspondence was in process, that there was no admission of its genuineness, and it was said by the defender to be incomplete. In these circumstances it was entirely irregular to print and box the various appendices which contain it. It cannot be too clearly understood by the profession that no documents must be printed for the Inner House which have not been lodged in process, and it is the duty of the clerk to refuse to receive into the process any print of documents which are not already in process. If there has been an error in failing to lodge some documents on which parties intended to found, a motion must be made to the Court for leave to lodge it in process. So firmly has this rule been fixed in our practice that the Court is entitled to assume that any appendix which is boxed to it will contain only documents which are in process.

In the circumstances above narrated I think it is the duty of the Court to refuse to look at the correspondence.

Judgment:

The Lord Justice-Clerk and Lord Guthrie concurred.

Lord Ardwall was absent.

Lord Dundas was sitting in the Extra Division.

Counsel:

Counsel for Pursuer and Reclaimer— Wilson, K.C.— Armit. Agents— Clark & Macdonald, S.S.C.

Counsel for Defender and Respondent— Blackburn, K.C.— Hamilton. Agents— Carmichael & Miller, W.S.

1911


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1911/49SLR0094.html