The Caledonian Railway Company, being anxious to obtain direct access into the county of Fife, agreed with the Kirkcaldy and District Railway Company that the latter should promote a bill for the construction of four railways. it was agreed between the parties that, in the event of the bill authorising the construction of the railways not receiving the Royal Assent from any cause other than the withdrawal therefrom of the support of the Caledonian Railway Company, that company should ‘contribute towards the expense of the said bill (1) two-thirds of all outlays incurred in connection with the promotion of the bill; (2) one-third of the professional charges . . in connection with such promotion.’ the House of Lords held the preamble not to be proved so far as it related to the three railways Nos. one, two, and four included in the bill. These three were the only ones in which the Caledonian Railway Company was interested. The preamble was held to be proved as regards railway No. 3.
In an action at the instance of the Kirkcaldy Railway Company against the Caledonian Railway Company for payment of the proportionate amount of expenses connected with the bill, in accordance with the agreement between the parties, the defenders maintained-(1st) that the bill had in fact received the Royal Assent, and that on a sound construction of the agreement they were not liable for any portion of the sum claimed, and (2nd) that their obligation was one of relief only, and that as the whole expenses bad been paid by the North British Railway Company and not by the pursuers the claim of relief must fail.
Held (aff. judgment of the First Division) that under the agreement the defenders were liable in the sum sued for.
Judges:
Lord Chancellor (Halsbury), and Lords Ashbourne, Shand, Davey, Brampton
Citations:
[1901] UKHL 579, 38 SLR 579
Links:
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Contract
Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.630991