The House dismissed the Council’s appeal as incompetent. An opinion of the court upon questions of law given on consideration of a case stated under provisions such as those in section 3 of the 1972 Act did not constitute a ‘judgment’ within the meaning of section 40(1) of the 1988 Act.
Citations:
1991 SC (HL) 1
Statutes:
Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 3, Court of Session Act 1988 40
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd (Scotland) SC 13-Jun-2013
After long running litigation between the parties, a shareholder and director of Apollo sought to represent the company in person. He was refused leave by the Court of Session, and now sought to appeal. The Court considered the possibility of an . .
Cited – Apollo Engineering Ltd (In Liquidation) v James Scott Ltd SCS 18-Jan-2012
The parties had for several years been involved in litigation and arbitration. Apollo’s funds had run out and a director sought permission to represent the company before the court. He had asked the court to make an order under article 6 of the . .
Cited – Apollo Engineering Ltd v James Scott Ltd SCS 27-Nov-2012
Application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against order refusing permission for a shareholder and director of a party to represent the company.
Held: Leave was refused. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Constitutional
Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.526003
