Tod and Others v Tod and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1827 |
| Date | 01 January 1827 |
| Court | House of Lords |
English Reports Citation: 4 E.R. 1011
House of Lords
Mews' Dig. iv. 854, as to appeal for costs. See now Judicature Act, 1873, s. 49. and notes thereto in Annual Practice, 1901, ii. 439.
[639] TOD and others,-Appellants ; TOD and others,-Respondents. Et e Contra. [Mews' Dig. iv. 854, as to appeal for costs. See now Judicature Act, 1873, s. 49. and notes thereto in Annual Practice, 1901, ii. 439.] An election of Magistrates in a Royal Burgh, which takes place under a warrant from the crown restoring the Burgh, is an annual election within the meaning and provisions of the 7 Geo. 2. c. 16. s. 7, and 16 Geo. 2. c. 11. s. 22. An action of reduction and declaratur at common law, to set aside the proceedings, may be competent; but it must be brought within the two months prescribed by the statutes. An appeal will not lie for costs only, where costs are in the discretion of the Court: But where the Court is directed by an Act of Parliament to give costs, 1011 I BLIGH N.S. TOD 1'. TOD [1827] it is a proper subject of appeal if they are not given according to the requisition of the Act. The Lord Chancellor : * If this were a question arising upon the law of England, there would be no. doubt about it, for I do not apprehend that a statute which gave a summary complaint, is a statute which would take away the common law remedy, but the. case of 7oww.gr v. Johnson (Jan. 1766; Wight, p. 339), in the House of Lords, at a date pretty nearly contemporaneous, with the statute', appears according to Mr. Wight's note of it, to have decided, as it has been alleged from the bar, that the action of reduction must be brought within tvro months. Now, I cannot satisfy my mind on what ground it should be held that the action of reduction should be brought within two months, unless the statute related to actions of reduction as well as [640] summary complaints. Considering the nature of the evidence as we find it in the printed cases in the House of Lords, arid that there is not a single word that would support the judgment in that evidence unless it was given upon the point, whereas, on the other hand, that point does not appear to have been mentioned in the printed cases, there appears to be something hanging about that case, which makes it look very much like an authority of the House of Lords upon the point. Whether that case which has been so represented as of authority has been well decided, is a matter which I apprehend this House could not trust itself to examine. This is an action of reduction and declaratur for setting aside the proceedings at an election, which were had in consequence of His Majesty having been pleased to restore the Burgh of Pittenweem. It has been very much discussed in the papers as well...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Donald Campbell and Company, Ltd and Others v Pollak
-
Scott v Bennett
...v. Callan 8 Ir. C. L. App. 10; S. C. 4 Ir. Jur. N. S. 4. Banks v. Newton 4 Dowl. & Lownd. 632; S. C. 11 Q. B. 340. Tod v. TodENR 1 Bligh N. S. 639. Doe d. Christmas v. OliverUNK 2 Sm. L. C. 656. Reed v. JacksenENR 1 East, 355. Rex v. CarlileENR 2 B. & Ad. 362. Irwin v. Sir George GrayENRELR......
-
Vijayalakshmi Devi A/P Nadchatiram v Mahadevi A/P Nadchatiram, 23-02-2009
...House, but the true rule is as stated by Lord Northington in Cooper v. Scott (11), by Lord Eldon in Tod v. Tod (1827), 2 Wils. & S. 542; 1 Bli.N.S. 639, HL, and by Lord Selborne in Asylum District (Managers) v. Hill (1880),5 App. Cas. 582, as well as by Sir Joseph Napier in the Judicial Com......