Scott v Livingstone
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 19 October 1918 |
| Date | 19 October 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 1. |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Justice-Clerk, Lord Dundas, Lord Guthrie.
LeaseRemovingNotice to removeForm of noticeDescription of subjectsSheriff Courts (Scotland) Act, 1907 (7 Edw. VII. cap. 51), secs. 36 and 39, and First Schedule, Rule 111, Form H.
A tenant who, under a verbal lease from a farmer, occupied from year to year a cottage on the farm, with garden, byre, and a field of five acres, received a notice of removing from the farmer in the following terms:I beg to serve formal notice to quit at Whitsunday (28th May) 1918 as I shall be requiring the cottage for an employee. The tenant having refused to quit at the term, the farmer brought an action of removing.
The Court dismissed the action, holding that the notice was invalid in respect that, as it did not sufficiently describe the subjects, it was not in the form prescribed in the First Schedule to the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act, 1907.
On 31st May 1918 John Scott, farmer, Drumhumphrey, Dalbeattie, brought an action in the Sheriff Court at Kirkcudbright against Mrs Janet Livingstone, who was tenant of a cottage on his farm, with garden, byre, and a field of five acres or thereby, on a verbal lease for the year from Whitsunday 1917 to Whitsunday 1918 at a rent of 10. The pursuer craved the Court to grant warrant to officers of Court summarily to eject the defender Mrs Janet Livingstone and her family from the cottage and garden, byre, and field of five acres or thereby, occupied by her on the farm.
The material averments of the pursuer, and answers thereto for the defender, were as follows:(Cond. 5) On 7th November 1917 the pursuer gave written notice of removal* to the defender, Mrs
Janet Livingstone in the following terms:Drumhumphrey, Corsock, Dalbeattie, 7th November 1917. Mrs Livingstone. Dear Madam,I beg to serve formal notice to quit at Whitsunday (28th May) 1918 as I shall be requiring the cottage for an employee. Yours truly, (Sgd.) J. Scott. This notice was on 8th November 1917 posted to Mrs Livingstone, and was received by her in due course. She accepted it as formal notice of removal and acted upon it as such, and soon afterwards took a house at Kirkmahoe from Adam Currie, farmer, Duncow, for the year from Whitsunday 1918, and so informed pursuer. Later she told pursuer it was going to cost her 5 to flit, and asked pursuer whether he would let her the adjoining cottage if she could get rid of the house in Kirkmahoe. Pursuer replied that he was willing to let her the adjoining cottage (formerly occupied by her), but not longer than six months as it would be required for a ploughman. The defender thereupon, in the beginning of April, went to the said Adam Currie and asked to be relieved of his house, and was relieved by him. She did not take the adjoining cottage, and told pursuer she would look for another house, but, on 17th April 1918, through her agents, intimated that she intended to remain, and on her agent's advice set her garden. The statements in answer, so far as not coinciding herewith, are denied. Admitted that the pursuer has put stock into the field. It was not occupied by defender. The only occupation she ever took of it was to sublet the grazing last summer, which she had no right to do. (Ans. 5) Admitted that defender received a letter from pursuer in the terms stated. Explained that no formal notice to quit was served as intimated therein. Defender did not accept said letter as a formal notice to terminate her tenancy under the pursuer at Whitsunday 1918, and defender reset her garden in the spring. Averred that said letter does not itself fulfil the requirements of a formal notice to quit the subjects tenanted by the defender, and consisting of said cottage, garden, byre, and field, in respect that(a) it does not require her to remove; (b) it does not describe any subjects...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Outlook Finance Limited Against William Lindsay, Executor Nominate In The Estates Of Euan Mcintyre Lindsay
...Ltd v European Property Holdings Inc. 2015 SLT (Sh Ct) 201. [11] For the defender I was referred additionally to Scott v Livingston 1919 SC 1; Strathclyde Securities Co Ltd v Park 1955 SLT (Sh Ct) 79; Hill Samuel & Co Ltd v Haas 1989 SLT (Sh Ct) 68; Cedar Holdings Ltd v Iyyaz 1989 SLT (Sh C......
-
Kerr v Bryde
...v. Drysdale, (1849) 6 Bell's App. 455, at p. 461. 3 4 D. 1426. 4 See also Blain v. FergusonUNK, (1840) 2 D. 546; Scott v. Livingstone, 1919 S. C. 1; Campbell's Trustees v. O'Neill, 1911 S. C. 5 Woodfall's Landlord and Tenant, (20th ed.) pp. 956, 958. 1 Peizer v. FedermanUNK, [1921] 38 T. L.......
-
Graham v Stirling
...v. Andrew, (1798) Hume's Dec. 562; Lockhart v. Twaddle, (1800) Hume's Dec. 564; Bett v. MurrayUNK, (1845) 7 D. 447; Scott v. Livingstone, 1919 S. C. 1. 3 Blain v. FergusonUNK, (1840) 2 D. 546, Lord Fullerton, at p. 4 M'Donald v. M'Donald, (1807) Hume's Dec. 580. 5 Young v. GerardUNK, (1843)......
-
Department of Agriculture for Scotland v Goodfellow
...such notice.…" 2 49 and 50 Vict. cap. 50. 3 13 and 14 Geo. V. cap. 10. 4 7 Edw. VII. cap. 51. 5 Williams v. Williams, supra, p. 196. 6 1919 S. C. 1. 7 Counsel also referred to Robertson v. Wilson, 1922, S. L. T. (Sh. Ct.) 21; and Watt v. Findlay, (1921) 37 Sh. Ct. Rep. 8 13 and 14 Geo. V. c......