Scottish Court of Session Decisions

The Court of Session Act 1868 (31 and 32 Vict. cap. 100) enacts—Section 94—“It shall be lawful for the Lords Ordinary at any time in vacation or recess to sign interlocutors pronounced in causes heard in time of session, or at any extended sittings, or at the trial of causes by jury or by proof before such Lord Ordinary; provided that where any such interlocutor is dated at or prior to the first box-day in vacation the same may be reclaimed against on the second box-day; and where the interlocutor is dated after the first box-day, then on the first sederunt day ensuing, or within such number of days from the date of such interlocutor as may be competent in the case of a reclaiming note against such interlocutor dated and signed during session.…”

The Codifying Act of Sederunt 1913, D ( i) 4, provides—“In all cases where the days allowed for presenting a reclaiming note against an interlocutor pronounced by a Lord Ordinary in the Outer House expire during any vacation, recess, or adjournment

Page: 219↓

of the Court, such reclaiming note may be presented on the first box-day occurring in said vacation, recess, oradjournment after the reclaiming days have expired; and if there be no such box-day, then on the first ensuing sederunt day.”

William Gray & Sons, pursuers, brought an action of damages for breach of contract against William M'Coard & Sons, defenders.

On 1st September 1920 the Lord Ordinary ( Ormidale) dismissed the action. The box-days in the vacation during which the interlocutor was pronounced were 12th August and 23rd September. On 15th October, the first sederunt day ensuing after the date of the interlocutor, the pursuers presented a reclaiming note.

In Single Bills of 16th October the defenders objected to the competency of the reclaiming note, and argued that it should have been presented on the second box-day— Countess Dowager of Seafleld v. Kemp, 1898, 25 R. 873, 35 S.L.R. 680, was cited.