[Court of Session—2d Division.]
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judge | Ld. Mackenzie,Lord Justice-Clerk |
| Judgment Date | 13 November 1827 |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - Second Division) |
| Docket Number | No. 2. |
| Date | 13 November 1827 |
Ld. Mackenzie Lord Justice-Clerk
Principal and Agent—Landlord and Tenant.—
In 1817, the defenders Pollock, Gilmour, and Company sold to the late James Wilson, (whom the pursuers represented,) for £5000, payable by half-yearly instalments, certain property in Glasgow, consisting chiefly of a cotton-mill, having attached to it a steam-engine and apparatus for the purpose of communicating the propelling power to the different parts of the mill, but without being furnished with any of the smaller or moveable machinery by which the manufacturing processes are carried on. By the missives of sale, Wilson was bound “to keep the whole houses, buildings, machinery, and apparatus thereof, erected or to be erected upon the said subjects, in proper and sufficient repair;” and he empowered Pollock, Gilmour, and Company, in case of neglect, “without any judicial authority or further consent, to execute the necessary repairs upon the said subjects,” for the expense of which they were to be reimbursed by him. At the date of this sale part of the mill was let to one M'Leod at a rent of £250, the rest being totally unoccupied; but in 1818 the pursuers let certain additional floors to M'Leod at a further rent of £350; and they also granted leases of other parts of the mill to different tenants, with right respectively to a proportionate quantity of power from the steam-engine,—the landlord being bound, in the leases so granted, to keep in repair the buildings and steam-engine,—and the tenants to keep in repair the small machinery belonging to them. M'Leod took possession of the floors let to him, and stocked it with machinery; but in 1821, his estate having been sequestrated, he made a settlement with his creditors by a composition. Pollock, Gilmour, and Company agreed to pay this composition on getting a conveyance to all his property in security. A general conveyance was accordingly granted to them, and afterwards made absolute; and, of the same date, the machinery in the mill belonging to M'Leod was separately and absolutely assigned to them for the price of £1200; of this sum £600 was paid, and for the remaining, £600 Pollock, Gilmour, and Company became bound to liquidate the rent of 1821, which amounted to that sum, and for which the machinery stood hypothecated.
The pursuers sequestrated the machinery in security of this rent, but took no...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Salomon v Commissioners of Customs and Excise
...tax of £16. 0s.6d. but he does dispute the customs duty. He says it is more than twice what it ought to be. He says it should be only £12. 6s,3d. 2Although the amount involved is small, the case has farreaching consequences. If Mr. Salomon had been a trader in cameras, importing this one fr......
-
Mills v Allen
...was to be given within twenty-one days, subject to the provision that as long as Mrs. Andrews paid regularly the monthly rent of £1. 6s, 3d., together with a further sum of 14s.4d. on account of arrears, the warrant should not be executed; and it was, subject to those directions, to remain ......
-
Re Simmons & Politzer
...on account" and £625 "Amount received from Lord Camrose". If this sum of £625 be added to the £1.499. 6s. 3d the result/is a total of £2,124. 6s 3d. A list of cheques which the Solicitors had received from the Applicant was attached to the Statement. 7 The Summons in the present proceedings......
-
Michael Roger Barry Unwin (Plaintiff) Stanton & Staveley Ltd (Defendants)
...injury to his eye, In respect of which the learned judge awarded him general damages of £500, plus special damage amounting to £59. 6s, 3d. So far as the quantum ofthe damages is concerned, no question arises on tins appeal, the defendants, however, have appealed to this court on the questi......