Riddell v Riddell
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 18 October 1890 |
| Date | 18 October 1890 |
| Docket Number | No. 1. |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Kincairney. I.
Process—Proof—Commission—Form of commission for the examination of a lunatic in a foreign country.—
Riddell raised a process of divorce against his wife for adultery with one Weegman. The Lord Ordinary granted decree, and the defender reclaimed. She asked for a commission to examine the alleged paramour Weegman, who was at this time in New South Wales, and was confined in an asylum for the insane. The Court granted the commission in these terms, viz.:—‘To take the examination of Eugene Weegman, who is now or lately was an inmate of the Hospital for the Insane, Callan Park, Balmain, near Sydney, New South Wales, provided always that the said commissioner is satisfied that the said Eugene Weegman is mentally fit to be examined; appoint said examination to take place on interrogatories and cross-interrogatories to be adjusted by the Clerk of Court, and appoint the said...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Minister for Justice and Equality v Prieto
...which may be imposed when ?where an accused is admitted to bail on his or her entering into a recognisance.? 24 It is true that Ord. 18, r. 1 of the District Court Rules (as substituted by the District Court (Criminal Justice Act 2007) Rules 2008 ( S.I. No. 41 of 2008) provides that in bail......
-
Kearsley v Klarfield
...told me that it is not the usual practice to plead malingering. If that is so, it seems to me that the usual practice is in disregard of O 18 r 1(a), which is itself a reflection of common justice. I asked for the defence to be pleaded and gave leave for the amendment" 44 The amended defenc......
-
Oxnard Financing S.A. v Rahn
...to strike out the writ under RSC Ord.18,r.19, to strike out the writ and statement of claim for non-compliance with the rules under RSC Ord.19,r.1, and to dismiss the action for want of prosecution. 18 The counter-response of the plaintiff was to take out a summons on 2nd October 1995 for l......
-
Arrow Air Inc. v Minister of Tourism et Al
...1994, the plaintiff having not served a statement of claim within the period of 14 days after appearances were entered as stipulated in Order 18 r 1. of the Rules of the Supreme Court, the 2nd defendant through its counsel filed a summons pursuant to Order 19 r. 1. Of the R.S.C. asking that......