Bonnar v Bonnar
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 25 May 1911 |
| Date | 25 May 1911 |
| Docket Number | No. 113. |
| Court | Court of Session |
Ld. Ormidale, Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Salvesen, Lord Cullen, Lord Ardwall, Lord Dundas.
Husband and WifeSeparation and alimentWife pursuer and reclaimerInterim award of aliment and expenses.
In an action of separation and aliment at the instance of a wife against her husband, the Lord Ordinary, after a proof, assoilzied the defender. The pursuer reclaimed, and moved for an interim award of aliment and expenses to enable her to prosecute the appeal.
The Court refused the motion.
On 24th September 1910 Mrs Bonnar brought an action of separation and aliment on the ground of cruelty, and for custody of the child of the marriage, against her husband, Neil Bonnar, Glasgow.
On 8th November 1910 the Lord Ordinary (Cullen) allowed a proof, and ordained the defender to pay aliment to the pursuer at the rate of 10s. per week to the date of the proof, and a sum of 10 to account of expenses. He also granted her the interim custody of the child. On 2nd February 1911 the pursuer received a further award of 10 to account of expenses.
On 3rd March 1911 the Lord Ordinary (Ormidale), after a proof, assoilzied the defender from the conclusions of the summons, and found the pursuer entitled to expenses.
The pursuer reclaimed, and on 13th May 1911 the case was sent to the Short Roll.
The pursuer thereafter presented a note, in which the foregoing facts were set forth, and in which she craved the Court to ordain the defender ad interim to pay her aliment and a sum of 20 to account of her expenses in the Inner House.
On the note appearing in the Single Bills on 25th May 1911, the respondent objected to the granting of it, and argued;In a consistorial action at the instance of a wife, it was in every case a question for the discretion of the Court, whether or not, in the circumstances, she should receive an interim award of aliment and expenses.1 When a wife who was pursuing an action was successful in the Outer House, and was brought to the Inner House on a reclaiming note,2 and still
more when she was defending an action at the instance of her husband,1 there was a strong case for an interim award in her favour. But there was no case in the books where, in such circumstances as the present, such an award had been granted. Unless a wife had a probable cause, she was not entitled to the expenses of an unsuccessful reclaiming note.2
Argued for the pursuer and reclaimer;When a wife was defending an action at the instance...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cox v Cox
...of law not previously decided in the Inner House. The Court, in the special circumstances, made an interim award. Bonnar v. Bonnar, 1911 S. C. 854, On 4th March 1941, Mrs Joan Constance Horne or Cox brought an action against her husband, Henry Kinloch Cox, in which she concluded,inter alia,......
-
Douglas v Douglas
...to the Court of Session, moved for an interim award of aliment pending the appeal. The Court refused the motion. Bonnar v. Bonnar, 1911 S. C. 854, Mrs Janie Ostwald Pittendrigh or Douglas brought an action in the Sheriff Court at Edinburgh against her husband David Douglas for payment of 64......