Reparation, No. 1. In Fleming v. Orr, the Court found that the owner of a dog which had destroyed sheep was liable, although it was not proved that the owner knew the dog to be vicious; but the judgment was reversed by the House of Lords. A master is civilly liable for the negligence of his servants, or others employed by him. Thus, the proprietors of stage-coaches will be subjected in damages for injuries arising from careless driving. This liability, however, may be said to arise ex contractu, since such persons engage to convey passengers in safety. But, independently of any express contract, a master has been found liable for damages done by those employed by him, although he was absent, and they were acting against his orders.
Definition source
Bell, William, A Dictionary and Digest of the Law of Scotland, 7th ed. rev. George Ross (Edinburgh: Bell & Bradfute, 1861), s.v. “Reparation.” Public domain.
Legal Subject: Reparation |
| Case | Date | Legal Subject | Abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| M'Tier v. Lord Stonefield's Interlocutor | 1789 | Tack, Lease, Arrestment, Sequestration, Reparation, Bankruptcy | John M'Tier petitioned to alter Lord Stonefield's interlocutor, which held him liable for rebuilding the byre and kiln at Chang and for the value of moveable goods carried away. Based on the single document cataloged for this case. |
Documents discussing this subject (34)
- A. R. Henderson v. John Mackay — Revised, 4 Oct 1832
- Alexander Smith v. James Grant and George Leslie — Reclaiming Petition, 17 Feb 1857
- Allan Lockhart v. George Dalziel — Replies, 20 Feb 1765
- Andrew Chalmer v. James Pringle — Answers, 29 Nov 1764
- APPENDIX TO THE FOREGOING ANSWERS, CONSISTING OF EXCERPTS from the Proof, the Admissions of the Parties, and other Proceedings ingrossed in the Decreet of Reduction, Damages, &c. o
- Captain Hamilton v. The Dutch East India Company — Information
- Charles Elder v. John Croall — State of the Process, 12 May 1848
- David Turnbull v. James Rankines, John Rankines and John Black — Answers, 2 Jan 1796
- Inglis v. Lord Stonefield's Interlocutor — Petition, 14 Jul 1789
- James Donaldson v. George Home — Answers, 25 Jun 1741
- James Scrimgeour and Son v. William Alexander and Sons — Information, 1 Feb 1769
- John Forrest Elder v. John Croall — Summons, 12 May 1848
- LC Volume 01 — Petition, 16 May 1806 [2]
- M'Tier v. Lord Stonefield's Interlocutor — Petition, 4 Aug 1789
- Mary Ralston Nicholl and William Henney v. James Crawford, John Hair, Robert Crawford, and Mrs Mary M'Clyment or Climie — Condescendence, 30 May 1854
- Miss Magdalen Graham v. Sir John Gordon of Invergordon — Answers
- Petition — Capt
- Petition — Hugh Rose, Esq. against Lord Pitmilly's Interlocutors
- Petition — James Bisset against Lord Alloway's Interlocutor [2]
- Petition — John Mitchell against Lord Pitmilly's Interlocutor
- Petition — Maxwell Gordon against Lord Hermand's Interlocutor
- Petition — Thomas Robertson younger of Middlefield, Writer in Cupar, and John Flockhart, Procurator-Fiscal of Court for his Interest, Pursuers
- Reclaiming Petition — Hugh Rose, Esq. against Lord Pitmilly's Interlocutor
- Reclaiming Petition — Messrs. Henry Scotland & Co. against Interlocutor of Lord Glenlee
- Richard Griffin & Company v. James Hedderwick and Son — Respondents' Case, 3 Dec 1840
- Sir George Home v. John Smart — Answers, 3 Sep 1795
- The Heritors, Ministers, Elders, and Kirk-Session of South Leith v. David Scott, Dr George Wood, Alexander Burnett, and Andrew Scott — Answers [2]
- Thomas Langton and Messrs. Gordon and Harkness v. Robert Crockatt and Others — Revised Case, 30 Sep 1830
- Thomas Whitfield v. Macdonald and Macnab — Summons, 15 Jul 1833
- Vol-441-183-224 unsorted seg193
- Walter Jardine v. William Creech, Charles Elliot and William Smellie — Information, 7 Feb 1775
- Walter Jardine v. William Creech, Charles Elliot and William Smellie — Information, 7 Feb 1775 [2]
- William Macdonald v. Mackie and Company — Summons, 14 Mar 1828
- William Macdonald v. Messrs Mackie & Co. — Revised Case, 26 May 1829
