Strachan v Clyde
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 13 November 1882 |
| Date | 13 November 1882 |
| Docket Number | No. 2. |
| Court | Court of Session |
Lord Mure, Ld. Craighill, Lord Fraser.
County Franchise—Tenant—Servant or Tenant—Acquiescence in sublease by Landlord.—
The servant of a company occupied a house which the company held under a lease which excluded subtenants, and there was no evidence of acquiescence by the landlord in a sublease. Held that the servant was not entitled to be enrolled in the register of voters as tenant and occupant of the house.
At a Registration Court for the county of Linlithgow, held at Bathgate on 4th October 1882, William Strachan, a voter on the roll, objected to David Clyde, who stood on the assessor's list as ‘David Clyde, bricklayer, Greendykes, tenant and occupant, house, Greendykes Farm,’ being entered on the register of voters.
The Sheriff-substitute (Melville) repelled the objection, and allowed Clyde to be enrolled as ‘tenant and occupant.’
The objector took a case.
The facts as stated were:—‘That in the Valuation-rolls for the years 1881–82 and 1882–83 the Broxburn Oil Company, Limited, is entered as...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Agar v Hyde; Agar v Worsley
...Court of Appeal in the present case1. The Court of Appeal stressed that, when considering, on an application for leave to proceed under Pt 10 r 2, whether there is a good arguable case, the test is to be related to the jurisdictional nexus required by Pt 10 r 1A, not the merits of the claim......
-
Regie Nationale Des Usines Renault Sa v Zhang
...its jurisdiction and stay the action brought against the Renault companies. The stay application 11 Pursuant to the requirement in Pt 10, r 2A, there was appended to the statement of claim filed by Mr Zhang, a notice stating: ‘1. The Court may, on application made by you in accordance with ......
-
Commonwealth of Australia(Plaintiff) v Davis Samuel Pty Ltd ACN 083 081 985 (First Defendant)
...Court Procedures Rules 2006 (ACT), rr 223, 1600, 6008(3), 6464, 6906, 7000 Supreme Court Rules 1937 (ACT), O 2 r 1, O 2 r 8, O 2 r 11, O 10 r 2, O 13 r 17, r 17(4), O 19 r 14, O 23 r 12, O 24 r 3, O 32 r 12, O 69 r 1, O 69 r 2, Div 40.2 Supreme Court Rules (Amendment) (ACT), Subordinate law......
-
National Asset Loan Management Ltd v Kelleher
...to the defendant to avail himself thereof.? 27 Counsel for the defendant acknowledges that the Court would have jurisdiction pursuant to O. 10, r. 2, to preclude the pursuit of the counterclaim in the present proceedings but submits that any such decision would have to be made subsequent to......