If you found BAILII useful today, could you please make a contribution?

Your donation will help us maintain and extend our databases of legal information. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month donates, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.

Thank you very much for your support!


BAILII [Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]

Scottish Court of Session Decisions


You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Colin Dunlop v Walter Ralston, &C. [1600] 5 Brn 428 (00 January 1600)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1600/Brn050428-0395.html
Cite as: [1600] 5 Brn 428

[New search] [View without highlighting] [Printable PDF version] [Help]


[1600] 5 Brn 428      

Subject_1 DECISIONS of the LORDS OF COUNCIL AND SESSION, reported by ALEXANDER TAIT, CLERK OF SESSION, one of the reporters for the faculty.
Subject_2 DECREET-ARBITRAL.

Colin Dunlop
v.
Walter Ralston, &C


Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy

In a dispute betwixt Colin Dunlop, merchant in Glasgow, and Walter Ralston &c., in Carmyle; Mr Wallace of Cairnhill, advocate, sole arbiter, pronounced a decreet-arbitral. In the reduction, whereof it was objected that he had decerned for £40 for his own trouble, and £6 for his clerk;—it was argued, that, though an arbiter is justly entitled to a gratuity for trouble, and may even prosecute for it before the Judge Ordinary, yet it is not lawful for him to modify the extent of it himself, or to decern for it. So that, in so far, the decreet-arbitral was ultra vires. The fact was admitted as to the decerniture. But it was said that the scroll of the decreet had been shown to the parties' agents, and not objected to. This was refused; at least that they had not agreed to the sums awarded. The Lords, inter alia, repelled the objection, as it did not appear that any thing unfair was meant; and though Ralston reclaimed against the interlocutor, as to the other points, this point was not mentioned.

The electronic version of the text was provided by the Scottish Council of Law Reporting     


BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1600/Brn050428-0395.html