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 >> Ness v. Mills' Trustees [1923] ScotLR 459 (19 May 1923) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1923/60SLR0459.html Cite as: [1923] SLR 459, [1923] ScotLR 459 |
||
[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]
Page: 459↓
(Single Bills.)
[
(Reported ante, January 17, 1923, supra, p. 241.)
In an action of declarator and payment against testamentary trustees an interlocutor assoilzieing the defender was pronounced in ignorance of the pursuer's death. On the application of the pursuer's executrix the Court sisted her as pursuer in room of the deceased and of new assoilzied the defenders.
The circumstances in which the action was raised are narrated in the previous report ut supra.
On the 17th January 1923 the Court assoilzied the defenders. Thereafter a note was presented to the Lord President by Mrs Stewartina Mary Ness or Scott, which included the following passage:—“Since the said interlocutor [viz., the interlocutor of 17th January assoilzieing the defenders] was pronounced it has come to the knowledge of the pursuer's agents that the said Mrs Mary Stewart or Ness died on 29th November 1922. The minuter is her sole accepting
Page: 460↓
executrix nominated and appointed by her settlement dated 21st June 1922. In these circumstances the minuter desires to be sisted as executrix foresaid in room and place of the said Mrs Mary Stewart or Ness as pursuer in this action. It would also appear to be necessary to rehear the parties, or to have the said interlocutor repeated without a rehearing. The minuter without acquiescing in the terms of the said interlocutor is prepared to concur in the latter course.” Counsel for the minuter cited the case of Gibson's Trustees v. Gibson, 7 Macph. 1061.
Counsel for the defenders stated that he did not oppose the motion.
The Court sisted the minuter as pursuer in the cause, and of new assoilzied the defenders from the conclusions of the summons.
Counsel for Minuter— Keith. Agents— Simpson & Marwick, W.S.
Counsel for Defenders— J. A. Christie. Agents— Henderson, Munro, & Aikman, W.S.
