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!



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

Scottish Court of Session Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Paton v Roy [1835] CA 13_1081b (9 July 1835)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1835/013SS1081b.html
Cite as: [1835] CA 13_1081b

[New search] [Help]

SCOTTISH_Shaw_Court_of_Session

Page: 1081↓

Paton

v.

Roy
No. 336.

Court of Session

1st Division

July 9 1835

Lord President, Lord Mackenzie

Robert Roy,ss     Petitioner.— Penney. Paton,     Respondent.

Subject_Agent and Client—ssExpenses.—

In an application under the Act of Sederunt February 1806, the agent is entitled, where his account has been fairly and reasonably charged, to decree for the expenses of the application, as well as for the taxed amount of the account.

Robert Roy, W.S., presented a petition under the Act of Sederunt, 6th February, 1806, to have his account taxed, against his client Paton, and decree pronounced for the amount. On moving the approval of the auditor's report, Roy craved to be allowed the expenses of this application.

Lord President.—Unless unnecessary opposition was offered by the client I doubt whether these expenses should be awarded.

Lord Mackenzie.—The procedure is for the mutual behoof of the agent and client, and, when the account has been fairly charged, I do not think the whole expense of taxation and decree should fall on the agent.

Penney, for petitioner.—If expenses be not allowed under such an application as this, agents may be induced to raise ordinary actions for payment of their accounts, in which, if they succeed, they will obtain expenses. But such a procedure would be much against the interest of clients in general. And the question cannot now be considered open, as the Court have repeatedly found the agent entitled to these expenses, and, on the last occasion, did so after specially referring to the clerk of Court as to the practice. 1

The petition was delayed for a day in order that the precedents might be referred to, and, on considering these,

The Court decerned in favour of the petitioner for the expense of the application, as well as for the taxed account.

Solicitors: R. Roy, W.S.—Agents.

_________________ Footnote _________________

1 Martin, May, 1835, ante, p. 838.
SS 13 SS 1081 1835

BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1835/013SS1081b.html