False imprisonment. Under the Act 1701, c. 6, magistrates and officers issuing or executing illegal warrants of imprisonment, or acting without warrant, are liable in damages. (See Running Letters.)
Definition source
Kinnear, J. B., Digest of House of Lords Cases Decided on Appeal from Scotland, 1709-1864 — Glossary of Scottish Law Terms (Edinburgh, 1865). Public domain.
Legal Subject: Wrongous Imprisonment |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aitken and Others v. Wilson and Bannatyne | 1779 | Birly court, Jurisdiction, Riot, Arrestment, Caution, Wrongous Imprisonment | This case was about a “birly court”: a voluntary association of small proprietors and tenants that regulated property lines and common pasturages in their neighborhood. The birly court in Elsrighill (Elsrickle) levied a fine on one of its members, John Wilson. When Wilson refused to pay, the court’s elected officers seized two of his pewter plates. Wilson complained to the sheriff of Lanarkshire, alleging that the birly court lacked authority to take such an action. The sheriff-substitute, John Bannatyne, found that the officers were guilty of a riot and had them detained. In response, the officers sued both Wilson and Bannatyne for wrongful imprisonment. |
| Andrew v. Murdoch | 1803 | Wrongful imprisonment, Due process, Arrestment, Sequestration, Interlocutor, Wrongous Imprisonment | The pursuer raised an action of wrongful imprisonment against the defender, Sheriff-Substitute, and challenged the interlocutor that ordered his incarceration. The pursuer argued that the defender violated the Act of 1701, by not giving a deliverance on the petition for bail within the required time, and also by not admitting the pursuer to bail when he was accused of a bailable offense. The purpose of the act was to protect people from oppressive acts by those entrusted with executive or ministerial authority. |
Documents discussing this subject (20)
- Andrew Aitken and others v. John Bannatyne — Information, 15 Nov 1779
- Andrew Aitken and others v. John Wilson and John Bannatyne — Information, 18 Jan 1780
- Andrew Aitken v. John Wilson — Information, 15 Nov 1779
- Andrew — Petition, 18 Jan 1803
- Andrew — Petition, 29 Jun 1804
- Callum M'Gregor, alias John Grant v. His Majesty's Advocate — Information, 6 Aug 1773
- Duncan Campbell v. John Macewan and Daniel Macaulay — Information, 24 Jun 1788
- James Dougal v. Alexander Macartney — Additional Appendix to Reclaiming Note, 11 Dec 1829
- James Duff and William Duff v. Laurence Sutherland — Replies, 10 Oct 1793
- James Henderson v. William Scott — Information, 6 Sep 1792 [2]
- John Macglashan v. Myles Macphail, James Laing, and Alexander Walker — Information, 2 Dec 1788
- Joseph M'Christie v. Mrs. Helen Kea or Fisher — Reclaiming Note, 2 Sep 1830
- LC Volume 03 — Petition, 16 Jan 1810 [2]
- Petition — Capt. James Cuthbert of Milncraig, James Grant of Earnhill, and Alexander Grant Sheriff
- Petition — John Brander against an Interl. of Lord Henderland, dated 25th July 1787
- Petition — William Fyfe against Lord Mackenzie's Interlocutor
- Petition — William Reid, Esq. against Lord Meadowbank's Interlocutor
- Poor May or Marjory Murray v. Christian Bisset, Catherine Crombie, and Thomas Thomson — Condescendence, 23 Jun 1810
- Renton v. Fordyce — Appendix, 2 Feb 1825
- William Lawrie v. Alexander Stewart — Answers, 7 Jun 1815
