Kirk-Session of North Berwick v Sime
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 14 November 1839 |
| Docket Number | No. 7 |
| Year | 1839 |
| Date | 14 November 1839 |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - Second Division) |
2D DIVISION.
No. 7
Kirk-Session of North Berwick
and
Sime
Title to Pursue—Process—Summons.—
Where a summons bore to be at the instance of the kirk-session of a parish, and of the members thereof individually,—amendment of the libel consented to by the pursuers, at the suggestion of the Court, to the effect that the summons should be at the instance of the individual members of the session nominatim, for themselves and as composing the kirk-session; the kirk-session, per se, not being a corporation.
To continue reading
Request your trial
3 cases
-
Al-Kateb v Godwin
...Litigation:Fugue or Fusion?Recent Developments and Challenges in Internalizing International Law’, (2002) 16 Supreme Court Law Review ( 2d) 23; Spiro, ‘Treaties, International Law, and Constitutional Rights’, (2003) 55 Stanford Law Review 1999 at 2026–2027; Bodansky, ‘The Use of Internation......
-
R & R Developments Ltd v AXA Insurance UK Plc
...the proposer's statement is true in law, for any ambiguity in the question results in construction of the question against the insurer”. [22– 2D23]. 15 To similar effect MacGillivray 11 th ed. at §16–025:— “Another difficulty frequently arises in connection with the accuracy of the proposer......
-
R v Sajid Hussain
...the lawyers, isn't it? 91 Yes, absolutely. It is. LORD JUSTICE RIX 92 It's in no other sense new evidence. 93 It answers section 23( 2)(d). 23(2)(d). LORD JUSTICE RIX 94 Yes. All right. Anything else that either of you want to say about directions, because at the moment it looks like the on......
1 books & journal articles
-
Governmental Indirection Patent Infringement: The Need to Hold Uncle Sam Accountable Under 28 U.S.C. § 1498
...States patent can prevent others from “making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the 22 See infra Part IV.A.2.d. 23 See infra Part IV.B. 24 U.S. CONST. art. I, § 8, cl. 8. 25 Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 308 (1980) (quoting section 1 of the Patent Act of......