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 >> Crombie v. Crombie [1868] ScotLR 5_504_1 (19 May 1868) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1868/05SLR0504_1.html Cite as: [1868] ScotLR 5_504_1, [1868] SLR 5_504_1 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 504↓
In an action of aliment at the instance of a wife, which contained neither a conclusion for adherence nor separation, a sum allowed by the Lord Ordinary to the pursuer to meet the expenses of the case, pending the trial of the question of the competency of the action, sustained.
This was an action of aliment brought by a wife against her husband, and unaccompanied by any conclusion either for adherence or separation. The defender pleaded that, in respect of the absence of such conclusions, the action was incompetent; and, at all events, that the ground of action was extinguished by an offer made by the defender in his defences, to receive his wife and aliment her in his house.
The Lord Ordinary having appointed a debate on these questions, he decerned ad interim against the defender for £20 to meet the pursuer's expenses.
The defender reclaimed.
Pattison and Mackay for him.
Strachan in answer.
The Court adhered to the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor, holding that the absence of a conclusion for adherence on the one hand, or separation on the other, did not necessarily make the action incompetent, and that the question whether that was the result was one of some difficulty.
Solicitors: Agent for Pursuer— Andrew Beveridge, S.S.C.
Agent for Defender— Thomas Wallace, S.S.C.
