Campbell v Leith Police Commissioners. [Court of Session—2d Division.]
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 21 June 1866 |
| Date | 21 June 1866 |
| Docket Number | No. 165 |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - Second Division) |
Ld Ormidal. R.
General Police Act, 25th and 26th Vict. cap. 101—Private Street—Notice.—
SEQUEL of case reported of date June 29, 1865, ante, vol. iii. p. 1035.
This was a note of suspension and interdict at the instance of John Archibald Campbell, C.S., against the Leith Police Commissioners, for the purpose of having the respondents prohibited from interfering in any way with the street in North Leith called Prince Regent Street, or with the piece of ground there belonging to the com plainer.
On 11th June 1863 the respondents, acting under the 150th section of the General Police and Improvement Act, 1862, 25 and 26 Vict. c. 101 (which they had adopted in October 1862), resolved to cause Prince Regent Street, as being in their opinion a private street as defined by the Act, to be freed from obstructions, and paved or causewayed, and the clerk was directed to give the statutory notice, in terms of this Act, with reference thereto.
Section 150 of the Act enacts,—‘That where any private street or part of a street is, at the adoption of this Act, formed or laid out, or shall at any time thereafter be formed or laid out, and is not, together with the footways thereof, sufficiently levelled, paved, or causewayed and flagged, to the satisfaction of the Commissioners, it shall be lawful for the Commissioners to cause any such street or part of a street, and the footways thereof, to be freed from obstructions, and to be properly levelled, paved, or causewayed,’ &c.
The suspender averred that Prince Regent Street was not a private street, and that he had not got the proper statutory notice of the operations. He pleaded, inter alia;—(3) The respondents are not entitled to proceed with the execution of the works complained of, seeing that they have not given the notices of their intention so to do required by the statute, as prescribed by sections 394 and 397, and other clauses, (4) The said proceedings are illegal, unwarranted, and unauthorised by the statute, in respect that Prince Regent Street is not a private street as defined by the statute.
The Lord Ordinary sustained the third plea in law for the complainer, and granted the suspension and interdict.
The respondents reclaimed.
By interlocutor dated June 29, 1865, the Court, before answer, allowed both parties a proof of their averments as to the notices given by the respondents of the operations proposed to be made by them on Prince Regent Street complained of.
Upon 3d November 1865 the Court, having considered the proof for both parties, ‘Find that the respondents gave notice, in terms of the 394th section of the Act 25 and 26 Vict. c. 101, of their intention to cause the street, or alleged...
To continue reading
Request your trial