13 Jun 1766Mandate

Pursuer Alexander Mudie claimed that Alexander Ouchterlony had verbally commissioned him to purchase a tenement in Arbroath without disclosing that Oucterlony was his principal. Mudie was sued in connection with the deal and, in turn, raised an action against Ouchterlony; however, Ouchterlony died while the litigation was pending. Mudie then renewed the process against Ouchterlony’s representatives. They denied any knowledge of the commission and argued that it could only be proved by a writing.

Documents in this case (1)

People involved

Places

Pursuer Alexander Mudie claimed that Alexander Ouchterlony had verbally commissioned him to purchase a tenement in Arbroath without disclosing that Oucterlony was his principal. Mudie was sued in connection with the deal and, in turn, raised an action against Ouchterlony; however, Ouchterlony died while the litigation was pending. Mudie then renewed the process against Ouchterlony’s representatives. They denied any knowledge of the commission and argued that it could only be proved by a writing.

Published Reports

William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), pg. 12403
View Report
Sir David Dalyrymple of Hailes, Decisions of the Lords of Council and Session, from 1766 to 1791 (1826), pg. 15, , pg. 180
View Report, View Report

Locations