AI-transcribed

Injunction.

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: Interdict

Case Date Legal Subject Abstract
Anderson v. Saunders 1829 Sasine, Interdict, Aliment, Feu, Interlocutor, Possession James Anderson and others raised an action of suspension and interdict against Robert Saunders concerning Saunders’ obstruction of a common stair leading to Anderson’s cellars and back-green, which Saunders used to access a sunk storey via a locked spar-door. Saunders answered the reasons of suspension and interdict, resisting the claims of nuisance and exclusive use. Following an interlocutor by Lord Medwyn, Ordinary, Anderson reclaimed against the decision, and Saunders subsequently appealed the interdict and suspension order barring his access. Both parties then submitted Cases arguing their competing rights to the stair, with Anderson contending that Saunders had no right to shut up the common passage and Saunders seeking alteration of the interlocutor granting the interdict against him.
Cadell and Davies, and Others v. Stewart 1803 Intellectual property rights, Copyright, Interdict, Aliment, Literary Property, Succession Defender Thomas Stewart, a bookseller in Glasgow, released a book consisting of previously unpublished letters from the late poet Robert Burns to "Clarinda" (Agnes Macelhose), who consented to the letters’ publication. Booksellers Cadell and Davies in London and William Creech in Edinburgh owned the rights to all of Burns's compositions, and they petitioned the court for an interdict against Stewart's publication. The brother and children of Robert Burns appeared in court to support the petition. The booksellers and family members, as pursuers, claimed that the interdict was warranted because Burns had not transferred his rights to the letters by sending the documents to Clarinda.
Crawford, et al v. Wilson, et al 1794 Justices of Peace, Interdict, Statute, Common Law, Arrestment, Suspension
Creditors of Jackson and Esten v. Kemble (Two Folders) 1793 Patent, Creditor, Sequestration, Interdict, Trust, Lease The creditors of Jackson and Esten petitioned for possession of the Edinburgh Theatre in order to manage the property under a disputed patent held by Mrs Esten. Kemble, defending as lessee and trustee of the Theatre Royal, resisted the grant of an interdict against his possession, asserting his lawful title and the public interest and arguing that the Court ought first to investigate the validity of Mrs Esten's patent claim before removing him from the theatre.
Elisabeth Pierson v. Ninian Alexander 1782 Interdict, Adjudication, Servitude, Arrestment, Property, Burgh This case was about a wall situated at the border of two adjoining properties in Dundee. One of the adjoining property owners, Ninian Alexander, began taking down a house on his lot, including the wall. In response, the other adjoining property owners, Elizabeth and Katharine Pierson, petitioned the dean of guild to enjoin Alexander's project. The dean of guild court ruled in Alexander’s favor, and the Piersons appealed to the Court of Session. While the case was pending in the Court of Session, the Lord Ordinary ordered Alexander not to proceed any further in taking down the house. However, the Piersons subsequently complained that contrary to the judge’s order, Alexander had continued to take down the house and wall.
Fraser, et al v. Sprott 1796 Common Law, Gambling, Interdict, Bankruptcy, Sequestration, Creditor Patrick Frazer, Walter Berry, and Henry Farquharson pursued a process to remit a Magistrates' interdict against their private lottery, arguing that such lotteries were not prohibited by statute or common law. The respondent Sprott opposed the remit, contending that private lotteries constituted unlawful gaming and were injurious to public order and fair trade. The dispute centered on whether private lotteries were legally permissible or prohibited as harmful to the public.
Gibson v. Lord Justice Clerk's Interlocutor 1795 Tack, Interdict, Damages, Lease, Possession, Interlocutor Walter Scott petitioned the Court to alter the interlocutor that found him liable for expenses only, seeking instead an award of damages for loss caused by an interdict against road access. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Grays v. Brown 1832 Decreet-Arbitral, Lease, Damages, Arbitration, Interdict, Roads Patrick Gray, Patrick Gray Junior, and Robert Gray pursued William Henry Brown for damages arising from an interdict against their use of private roads on the farm of Freelands. Brown denied the claim. The pursuers subsequently lodged a reclaiming note against Lord Mackenzie's interlocutor, asserting the action was incompetent and seeking remission of expenses.
James Blyth v. Maberly's Assignees 1832 Bankruptcy, Interdict, Sequestration, Arrestment, Debt, Creditor James Blyth, as agent for John Maberly and Company and as holder of funds belonging to the firm, raised an action of multiplepoinding against Maberly's assignees to require them to produce their rights to the fund in his custody, while simultaneously seeking suspension of a warrant of seizure obtained by the assignees from the English bankruptcy court. The assignees demanded delivery of the property, disputing interdicts and asserting exclusive bankruptcy jurisdiction over all assets, and subsequently argued that the multiplepoinding was incompetent and unnecessary because the question of possession was already properly raised under the bill of suspension. The dispute thus centered on the conflict between Scottish multiplepoinding procedure and English bankruptcy jurisdiction.
James Turnbull and Malcolm Macdonald v. Sir George Home, Baronet 1793 Jurisdiction, Suspension, Arrestment, Proof, Sequestration, Interdict James Turnbull and Malcolm Macdonald, as suspenders, sought to compel their bound apprentice Alexander M'Kenzie to return to service and argued that he could not legally enter His Majesty's Fleet as a volunteer. Sir George Home, Baronet, maintained that a seaman formerly apprenticed to a slater might lawfully serve in the Fleet notwithstanding the opposition of his former masters. The dispute turned on whether an apprentice bound to a slater could voluntarily enter naval service or remained subject to his masters' claim for specific performance of the indenture.
Lauder v. Gibson 1793 Lease, Tack, Interdict, Possession, Aliment, Interlocutor Dr. Colin Lauder pursued William Gibson regarding the use of a road, having obtained an interdict against Gibson. Gibson answered that the road was necessary for his farm and that the interdict caused him patrimonial loss, whereupon Lauder petitioned the Court to alter Lord Dreghorn's interlocutors against suspension of the interdict. Gibson responded that the road had been historically used by his predecessors and was not excluded by the terms of his lease.
Macausland and Others v. Montgomery and Others, and the Magistrates of Glasgow 1792 Aliment, Advocation, Teinds, Adjudication, Interdict, Interlocutor John MacAusland and James Burns, for themselves and in behalf of the other members of the Convenery or Trades-House in Glasgow, petitioned the Court to alter its recent interlocutor. James Montgomery and others answered, contending that the petition had been given in the name of, but without the authority of, the Deacon-Convener, Collector and Trades-House of Glasgow.
Marshall, et al v. Magistrates and Town-Council of Glasgow 1788 Interlocutor, Interdict, Suspension, Charter, Act of Parliament, Possession The Examinators of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons in Glasgow, including Dr Robert Marshall, petitioned the Court to continue an interdict restraining the Magistrates and Town-Council of Glasgow from quartering soldiers upon them, pending a determination of their claimed charter-based immunity from such burdens. The Magistrates answered, responding to the physicians' argument that their faculty charter rendered them exempt from the quartering of soldiers.
Murdo Mackenzie of Ardross v. Thomas Houston of Creich 1829 Salmon Fishing, Interdict, Interlocutor, Res judicata, Possession, Aliment Documents available. Full description coming soon.
Mustart v. Stonefield's Interlocuter 1794 Impress Service, Contract, Interlocutor, Interdict, Fraud, Collusion Alexander Muftart and John Muftart petitioned the Court of Session to alter its recent interlocutor in their case against Stonefield. Based on the single document cataloged for this case.
Stewart v. Magistrates and Town Council of St. Andrews 1792 Election contest, Suspension, Reduction, Interdict, Election, Interlocutor Robert Stewart, claiming to be the duly elected Deacon of the Incorporation of Wrights in St Andrews, petitioned the Court to set aside the election of John Edie and declare his own title valid, alleging that Edie’s election was voided by a court interdict and insufficient legal votes. The Magistrates and Town Council of St Andrews defended Edie’s election as lawful and accused Stewart of unlawful usurpation of the office. The litigation proceeded through successive petitions and answers, with Stewart additionally moving the Court to alter interlocutors regarding expenses and other procedural orders.
The Incorporated Trades of Aberdeen v. The Magistrates, Council, and Guildry, of said City 1792 Trade, Foreign Trade, Aliment, Tack, Interdict, Rent The Incorporated Trades of Aberdeen raised an action against the Magistrates, Council, and Guildry of the city, maintaining that they were entitled to deal in all native commodities as freemen burgesses and challenging the town council's imposition of shore dues as unlawful discrimination. The litigation concerned the extent of the Trades' commercial privileges and the validity of the municipal levy.
Thomsons v. Campbell 1789 Sequestration, Bill of Exchange, Reduction, Multiple-Poinding, Interdict, Arrestment Andrew, George, and Andrew Thomsons petitioned the Court to alter Lord Monboddo's interlocutor. Neil Campbell of Inverliver answered, arguing that the petitioners had misstated the grounds of suspension and the nature of his plea.
Trustees upon the Berwickshire Turnpike Roads v. Mayor, Bailies, and Burgesses of the Borough of Berwick 1793 Trustees, Thirlage, Mala Fides, Statute, Interdict, Act of Parliament The Trustees upon the Berwickshire Turnpike Roads defended the placement of a toll-bar on the Eyemouth road against the Mayor, Bailies, and Burgesses of the Borough of Berwick, who sought suspension of the tolls under a 1793 turnpike act. The Corporation argued that the trustees had violated the statute by situating the gate closer to Eyemouth than to Berwick, thereby creating unequal distances prohibited by the act. The Trustees maintained that the gate was properly positioned as near as may be to the required distance from Berwick and that the Corporation's bill of suspension lacked legal foundation.
Wemyss v. Hope 1792 Lease, Tack, Interlocutor, Interdict, Res judicata, Arrestment Francis Charteris, Earl of Wemyss, petitioned the Court to alter Lord Ankerville's interlocutor in his action against Sir Archibald Hope concerning coal rights in Woolmet and Hill. Hope answered, disputing Wemyss's arguments on the merits of the coal rights, and separately petitioned to alter the same interlocutor insofar as it repelled his objection of *res judicata*. The litigation thus involved competing petitions to alter the interlocutory judgment, presenting both substantive questions of mineral rights and procedural questions of claim preclusion.
William Sprott v. Patrick Frazer 1796 Gambling, Common Law, Interdict, Bankruptcy, Sequestration, Statute William Sprott, Solicitor-at-Law and Procurator-Fiscal for the City of Edinburgh, answered a bill of advocation in which Patrick Frazer, Walter Berry, and Henry Farquharson sought to have the Magistrates' interlocutor and interdict against their lotteries remitted on the ground that private lotteries were lawful. Sprott contested this argument, maintaining that private lotteries were illegal and defending the magisterial prohibition. The case thus raised the question of the lawfulness of private lotteries, with the defenders seeking to overturn the interdict and the pursuer supporting the magistrates' authority to enforce it.

Documents discussing this subject (showing 100 of 370)