Scottish Court of Session Decisions

In this case Messrs J. & R. Muir, some time shawl manufacturers in Paisley, are pursuers, and Arnold Burrows Collett, merchant in Bombay, is defender; and the issue is as follows:—

“Whether, in or about the year 1845, the pursuers consigned for sale to the firm of Hubbard, Collett, & Company, merchants in Bombay, of which the defender was then a partner, 117 lace shawls and 240 lace handkerchiefs, or any part thereof? And whether the defender is resting owing to the pursuers the sum of £106, 2s, 6d., as the proceeds or value of said goods, or any part of said sum, with interest?”

Or,

Whether the said goods were consigned to the defender's said firm through Thomas Risk, merchant in Paisley, as agent for the pursuers? And whether the proceeds of said goods, when sold, were duly paid and accounted for to the said Thomas Risk, as agent foresaid?”

It appeared from the evidence that the goods in question, which had been selected by Mr Collett while in Paisley in 1845, were consigned by Messrs J. & R. Muir to the firm of Hubbard, Collett, & Co. on sale and return. On their arrival at Bombay, a sale of them was effected at the price of £29, 15s. 7d.—a sum very much lower than that stated in the invoices. No return thereof appears to have been made, either directly to the pursuers or through Mr Risk. The evidence of Mr James Muir, one of the pursuers, which had been taken by commission, was allowed to be received, owing to the enforced absence of the witness on the ground of ill-health, the defender's counsel admitting that his absence was unavoidable.

The jury, without retiring, returned a unanimous verdict in favour of the pursuers on the first issue, to the amount of £29, 15s. 7d., the price of the goods sold, with interest from the 1st December 1846, the date of the sale, and also for the pursuers on the defender's issue.