Montgomerie and Company, Ltd, v Wallace James
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 December 1903 |
| Judgment citation (vLex) | [1903] UKHL J1218-1 |
| Court | House of Lords |
| Date | 18 December 1903 |
[1903] UKHL J1218-1
House of Lords
After hearing Counsel, as well on Monday the 16th, Tuesday the 17th, Thursday the 19th, and Friday the 20th, as Monday the 23rd, days of November last, upon the Petition and Appeal of Montgomerie and Company, Limited, registered under the Companies' Acts, and having their Registered Office at 142 West George Street, Glasgow, praying, That the matter of the Interlocutors set forth in the Schedule thereto, namely, an Interlocutor of the Lords of Session in Scotland, of the First Division, of the 23rd of November 1898, also an Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary there, of the 18th of July 1899, also au Interlocutor of the said Lords of Session there, of the First Division, of the 17th of November 1899, also an Interlocutor of the said Lord Ordinary there, of the 7th of June 1901, and also an Interlocutor of the said Lords of Session there, of the First Division, of the 8th of March 1902, might be reviewed before His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament, and that the said Interlocutors might be reversed, varied, or altered, or that the Petitioners might have such other relief in the premises as to His Majesty the King in His Court of Parliament might seem meet; as also upon the printed case of John George Wallace James, lodged in answer to the said Appeal; and due consideration had this day of what was offered on either side in this Cause:
It is Ordered and Adjudged, by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, in the Court of Parliament of His Majesty the King assembled, That the said Interlocutor of the Lords of Session in Scotland of the 17th day of November 1899, in so far as it finds the Appellants liable in the expenses of the Reclaiming Note, and also the said Interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary there, of the 7th day of June 1901, in so far as it finds that the piece of ground referred to in the Action "has been appropriated from time immemorial for the use and enjoyment of the burgesses and inhabitants," and also the said Interlocutor of the Lords of Session there, of the 8th day of March 1902, so far as it adheres to the said finding of the said Lord Ordinary, and also in so far as it finds the Respondent entitled to expenses, be, and the same are hereby, Reversed: And it is further Ordered and Adjudged, That the Note of Suspension and Interdict presented by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
H.L. v. Can. (A.G.), (2005) 262 Sask.R. 1 (SCC)
...24 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 213]. Coghlan v. Cumberland, [1898] 1 Ch. 704, refd to. [para. 215]. Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace-James, [1904] A.C. 73 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 217]. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Procter, [1923] A.C. 253 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 218]. Benmax v. Austin Moto......
-
H.L. v. Can. (A.G.), (2005) 333 N.R. 1 (SCC)
...24 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 213]. Coghlan v. Cumberland, [1898] 1 Ch. 704, refd to. [para. 215]. Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace-James, [1904] A.C. 73 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 217]. Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v. Procter, [1923] A.C. 253 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 218]. Benmax v. Austin Moto......
-
Canada (Attorney General) v. H. L.,
...105, refd to. [para. 37]. Coghlan v. Cumberland, [1898] 1 Ch. 704 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 40]. Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace-James, [1904] A.C. 73 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 42]. Dominion Trust Co. v. New York Life Insurance Co., [1919] A.C. 254 (P.C.), refd to. [para. 43]. Mersey Docks and......
-
Northern Bank v Charlton
...from the decisions in S.S. Gairloch and Coghland v. Cumberland.It was recognised also in Montgomerie and Company Limited v.Wallace-James 1904 A.C.73 where the Earl of Halsbury L.C. said at75: "It is simply a question of fact, and doubtless, where a question of fact has been decided by a tr......
-
Litigation
...Ct Fed Ct]; Watford Electronics Ltd v Sanderson CFL Ltd [2001] BLR 143 at 155 [42], per Chadwick LJ. 1366 Montgomerie & Co v Wallace-James [1904] AC 73 at 75, per Lord Halsbury. An appellate court may substitute its decision on factual matters for that of a trial judge where it would be dis......
-
BOARD OF CUSTOMS & EXCISE V. BARAU
...Manor Nursing Home (1935) A.C. 243, 250. 40. Coghlan v. Cumberland (1898) 1 Ch. 704, 705. 41.Montgomerie & Co. v. Wallace - James (1904) A.C. 73, 75. 42. Usen Friday Ekpo v. The State (1982) 6 S.C. 22. 43.Board of Customs v. Okoro (1971) 2 All N.L.R. 314, 320. 35 44.Folorunsho v. Adeyemi (1......