Page images
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

nevertheless, give notice to the landlord before conclusions, differed as to the meaning to be vacating, section 15 (1) requiring that the attached to the words“ terms and conditions,” length of such notice must correspond with which are to be found in section 15 (1). In the length required by the original contract, or his judgment (at p. 691) Lord Justice Bankes where the original contract is silent on the said: “I do not think that the right to assign point, a three months' notice at least is necessary. a tenancy can be properly described as a term

Inasmuch as a statutory tenancy is not on or condition of the original contract of tenancy, , any contractual basis, it is clear that the if those words are to be understood in their particular provisions which apply to forfeiture ordinary sense; it is certainly not an express of leases such as section 14 of the Conveyancing term, nor, in my opinion, can such a term be Act, 1881, or section 212 of the Common Law implied. The right to assign is a right incident Procedure Act, 1852, only apply to contractual to the estate, just as a right to sell your watch tenancies, and cannot be taken advantage of or house or any other chattel that may belong by persons in the position of statutory tenants to you is a right incident to your ownership of (Brewer v. Jacobs, [1923] 1 K.B. 528).

the chattel, and the right to assign the one is A question which, however, gives rise to a no more a term or condition of the contract of great deal of difficulty, is as to the effect of the tenancy than the right to sell the other is a acceptance of rent from a statutory tenant, term or condition of the contract under which after knowledge of a breach by the statutory the chattel was purchased.” Lord Justice tenant of terms or conditions which were con- Scrutton, however, differed from Lord Justice tained in the original contract of tenancy. It Bankes on this point, and in his judgment (at is clear that there can be no such question as p. 695), he is reported as having said: “I am a forfeiture of a statutory tenancy, but the not able to agree with my Lord on the question argument may be advanced that, where there whether it (i.e. the right to assign) was has been a breach of a term or condition which term or condition’ of the original contract in was contained in the original contract of the sense in which those terms are used in this tenancy, and which has now become a statutory Act. I think it is clear that it was an incident term or condition by reason of the provisions of of the original contract.' section 15 of the Act of 1920, and where there As an inducement to a statutory tenant to has been a subsequent acceptance of rent with give up possession, section 15 (2) of the Act of full knowledge of the breach, the acceptance 1920 entitles him to receive from his landlord a of rent in such circumstances precludes the land

premium "—the exact words are lord from taking advantage of the breach. In “any sum and the giving of any other con

' an unreported case, however (West London sideration.” The statutory tenant, however, Property Co. Ltd. v. Blok), the Divisional Court is not entitled to demand or receive any fine appears to have arrived at a different con

or premium from any person other than his clusion, and to have held that in the case of a landlord, which fact in itself may be advanced statutory tenancy the acceptance of rent in in support of the proposition that the statutory such circumstances will not preclude the land tenant's protection ceases with his personal lord from taking advantage of the breach. It occupation of the premises. is submitted, however, that the judge, in exer- In conclusion, it should be noted that it has cising his discretion under section 4“5” (1) of been held in M'Ilroy Ltd. v. Clements ([1923] the 1923 Act, should take into consideration the W.N. 81) that a statutory tenant may be fact of the acceptance of rent in such circum- entitled to the benefit of an option to renew stances, and if he is satisfied that the acceptance contained in the original contract. This dedoes indeed amount to an express or implied cision, however, appears to be an entirely unwaiver on the part of the landlord of the breach satisfactory one, and it is open to question in question, he should refuse to make an whether à statutory tenant is entitled to order for possession.

exercise any option contained in the original I have referred in another article to the effect contract. As a general rule, all options are of the decision in Reeves v. Dean ([1924) 1 K.B. exercisable even after the original term has 685) and in Hicks v. Scarsdale Brewery Ltd. been determined, provided that the relation([1924] W.N. 189), and accordingly I shall now ship of landlord and tenant still continues. It make only a passing reference to them. The would seem, however, hardly accurate to latter case decided that the statutory tenant describe, as such a relationship, the relationship was entitled to protection, only so long as he existing between the owner of premises coming remained in actual occupation of the premises, within the Acts and the statutory tenant who while the former decided that the statutory may be in occupation thereof. tenant had no right to assign or (semble) sublet the premises. The Court of Appeal in Keeves v. Dean, although they arrived at the same

« fine” or

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON Owners of the Steamship (or Sailing Vessel)

B” (p. 11). This form appears to be capable of COURT OF SESSION PROCEDURE.

improvement in four respects : By A. R. G. M‘MILLAN, M.A., LL.B., Advocate.

(1) It should be competent to order the

pursuer, if it is so desired by the defender, to As was to have been expected, the Report of state his name and address. The defender is the Committee, jointly appointed by the entitled to know the names of the individuals Faculty of Advocates, the Society of Writers by whom he is sued, and these may not be to the Signet, and the Society of Solicitors in disclosed in the Register of Shipping. In the Supreme Courts, to consider the reform of England the plaintiff may be ordered to state Court of Session procedure is mainly concerned, his name and address if desired by the either directly or indirectly, with procedure in defendant. maritime and commercial causes. It is, of (2) The action should be directed, not against course, in such causes that the need for reform

“the owners of the ship B," but against "the is most apparent, and it is unfortunate that the owners and parties interested in the ship remit was not confined to them in the first B.” The latter form is of the essence of an instance. Had this been done, it is probable action in rem, since only under it can all persons that the Report would have already been for- with real and personal rights in the vessel be warded to the proper quarters with the unani- made parties to it. In certain cases the liamous approval of the three legal societies, and bility of such persons may be greater than that that the first step would have been taken of the owners themselves, and unless they are towards that reform of maritime and com- convened the action remains a personal one. mercial procedure which is so urgently needed. (3) The distinction drawn in the instance As things stand, however, the subject has been between steamships and sailing vessels is obscured in the wider question of general Court immaterial. Moreover, it ignores the existof Session procedure, and it is now probable ence of the internal combustion engine and that a considerable period will elapse before other methods of propulsion. The only the necessary legislation is secured.

material distinction in maritime law is that Undoubtedly, the most interesting feature of between “ships" and

ships" and "vessels," the rights the Report is the proposal for the establishment and liabilities of which are for some purposes of a special Admiralty and Commercial Court for different. A ship is necessarily either a "ship the conduct of all admiralty and commercial or a vessel," and the summons should be causes in the first instance (p. 12). It is in- directed against the owners of the ship or teresting to observe that this proposal is in vessel ” as in England, leaving her precise substance one for the revival, after an abeyance nature undetermined. of nearly one hundred years, of the old Scottish (4) The proposed form should be made apCourt of Admiralty in which all maritime and plicable also to actions against the owners of most commercial causes were for so long a the cargo of a ship. Most, if not all, of the conperiod conducted. The general principle of siderations which operate in favour of this form the proposals and the manner in which they are in an action against the owners of a ship operate worked out will recommend themselves to all also in its favour in an action against the owners who are concerned in the conduct of maritime of the cargo, as in an action of salvage when and commercial causes. They are not intended the liability of the shipowner is excluded to be exhaustive nor precise in form, and are by contract and the cargo is consigned under framed on broad lines which leave questions of bills of lading to some hundreds of different detail open for adjustment. No attempt is consignees. made to define commercial causes,

Arrestment.—The Report suggests that arrestcedure to be followed in them is not indicated. ment under the summons of an action should Apparently the general proposals regarding serve the double purpose of founding jurisprocedure are intended to apply more particu- diction against the defender, and of placing a larly to them. In maritime causes, however, nexus on the arrested subjects (p. 4). The the proposals follow closely the procedure of application of this proposal to a maritime cause the Admiralty Division of the English High in the proposed form is not clear. Presumably Court, and a new form of action modelled on the the arrestment would found jurisdiction against English Admiralty action in rem is suggested “the owners of” or against "the owners and (p. 11). Certain criticisms on points of detail parties interested in " the ship, whoever they suggest themselves.

might be, although they had had no personal Form of Action.—The Report proposes that service of the summons, and were in fact unthe instance of a maritime cause should be aware of the action. Such a result would be competent in the form “The Owners of the inequitable. In England, in a maritime action

, Steamship (or Sailing Vessel) A, against The in rem, an arrestment of the ship founds no


and the pro

[ocr errors]

It is par.


personal jurisdiction against the owners. In and in co-ownership actions.

cases where ques

Where is granted only against the proceeds of the ship. tions of accounting arise between co-owners, default of the appearance of the owners decree ticularly appropriate in de It is only if the owners enter appearance that and in such cases remits to persons of skill they incur personal liability for the full amount were formerly frequently made in Scotland. of their debt. There also appears to be no A lawyer might be selected to preside and reason in principle why the names and ad- guide the panel on questions of law, and the dresses of the registered owners only should be remainder of the members might be drawn added to the instance (p. 11), and not those of from merchants, as in England. persons whose ownership takes other forms, as Appraisement of Ship.--The proposal for the charterers by demise or mortgagees in pos-appraisement of a ship by a person of skill in session. Frequently a registered owner incurs cases where parties are not agreed as to her no liability whatever. The English form of value is of considerable importance (p. 12). A action should either be entirely ignored or ship is subject to large and rapid fluctuations adopted in toto. It may be noted that it is in value as the conditions of trade and the costs substantially similar to that formerly used in of construction vary from time to time, and the Scottish Admiralty Court.

there be at the time no market for the ship Dismantling.-The Report proposes that in in question. Her appraisement, therefore, by addition to a warrant of arrestment of a ship a person of skill would be of great value. There the summons of an action should contain a war- is no reason, however, why appraisement should rant to dismantle (p. 4). The expediency of be confined to questions of bail. It would, for this proposal is doubtful. In Scotland a ship instance, be of particular value for the purmay be arrested in an open roadstead. Dis- poses of the award in a salvage action. It mantling, however, entirely disables the vessel, might also be extended with advantage to quesand if she is dismantled in such a situation and tions concerning the value of cargo or freight. in consequence drives ashore or fouls another Formerly remits of this nature were frequently through stress of weather, the arrestor may be made in Scotland. liable in heavy damages. It is probable, there- Counter-claims.--The proposal that procedure fore, that dismantling should, as at present, be by counter-claim should supersede procedure by permitted only under a special warrant on cross-action would be of particular value in cause shewn.

actions for damage by collision. The change Separate Actions against the Same Ship.- would lead to simplication of procedure and The Report contemplates the raising of separate economy, and has already proved advanactions before different judges against the same tageous in England. ship (p. 11). Such procedure should not be Pleading.The rigidity of Scottish forms of competent. The arrestment of a ship in one pleading has recently been the subject of unaction places her under the jurisdiction of the favourable comment in the House of Lords. It particular Court in which that action is raised, is specially disadvantageous in maritime causes. and any order which the judge may subse- The introduction, therefore, of the preliminary quently make with reference to the ship affects Act in actions of damage by collision, and of the the interests of the parties to the other actions, statement of claim in maritime causes generwith the facts of which he may not be properly ally (p. 11), would make for elasticity and conseised. Thus he may release the ship from venience. The latter would be in substance a arrestment on security which may not be reversion to the practice of the Scottish Adadequate to cover all the claims against her, miralty Court, whereby the claim might be and before she is re-arrested she may have libelled after the action had already been raised proceeded to sea, and the remedy of the other on a blank precept. claimants lost.

Relation of the Court of Session to the Sheriff Assessment of Damage.—The practice of Court (p. 14).—The statutory jurisdiction of separating proof of the amount of damage from the Sheriff Court under the Merchant Shipping proof of liability is already frequently followed Act, 1894, in claims for salvage and for seain maritime causes. The Report proposes that men's wages, might be expressly excepted from damage in collision and patent actions should the proposed recommendation. be assessed by a panel of referees composed of No attempt is made in the Report to define solicitors and other persons experienced in the nature of a maritime cause, and, as is well shipping and commercial matters (p. 9). There known, there is no satisfactory definition, statuis, however, no reason why this procedure tory or otherwise, in existence. In these cirshould be confined to actions of damage by cumstances the classification followed in the collision and patent actions. It is equally Admiralty Division of the English High Court appropriate in actions concerning seamen's might well be adopted. The principle there wages, necessaries, bottomry bonds, mortgages, followed is to assign to the Admiralty jurisdiction all such claims as are appropriate to an apparent when it is remembered that the proaction in rem.

cedure of the English Admiralty Division has In proposing to assimilate Scottish maritime been adopted throughout the British Empire, procedure to that followed in England, the Com- and that statutes affecting British ships are mittee has followed the only logical course. framed with direct reference to it. The absence Maritime law is now the same, both in Scotland of a similar system of procedure in Scotland is and in England, and it is only appropriate that therefore a direct obstacle to their effective the procedure for enforcing it should be the interpretation and application in the Scottish

The need for assimilation is all the more Courts.

[ocr errors]



[Edinburgh, 15th July 1925.]

[ocr errors]

WHEREAS it is provided by the Act 15 & 16 Geo. V., ch. 33, section 41, that section 106
of the Court of Session (Scotland) Act, 1868, 31 & 32 Vict., ch. 100 (which relates to
Acts of Sederunt), shall, for the purposes of Acts of Sederunt relating to the Court of
Teinds, have effect as if references to that Act in the section included reference to the
Act. 15 & 16 Geo. V., ch. 33, and whereas it is, inter alia, enacted by the said Act
31 & 32 Vict., ch. 100, section 106, that the Court of Session may from time to time
make such regulations by Act of Sederunt for altering the course of proceeding
thereinbefore prescribed in respect to the matters to which that Act relates, and
whereas it is provided in paragraph 8 of the Sixth Schedule of the said Act 15 & 16
Geo. V., ch. 33, that in certain cases the deficiency of stipend caused by a surrender
shall be re-allocated among the heritors in the parish (if any) who have unexhausted
teinds not yet allocated for stipend, the Lords of Council and Session hereby enact
and declare that :-

1. Any claim under said paragraph 8 of the Sixth Schedule to have a deficiency
of stipend re-allocated among those heritors in the parish (if any) who have un-
exhausted teinds not yet allocated for stipend shall be disposed of either in a depend-
ing process of locality relative to the said parish or in the proceedings for adjustment
of the teind roll thereof.

2. The notification which the Clerk of Teinds is required by said paragraph 8
to make to the common agent of the heritors shall be given in such depending process
or in the proceedings for adjustment of the teind roll, as the case may

3. In the application of paragraph 8 to the case of a depending process of locality
it shall not be necessary for

the Clerk of Teinds to issue any certificate specifying the
amounts of stipend payable by the heritors whose teinds are affected by the re-
allocation. Said re-allocation shall be made in the interim or final locality, as the
case may be.

And the Lords appoint this Act to be entered in the Books of Sederunt, and to be printed and published in common form.




INCREASING FEES. [Edinburgh, 16th July 1925.)

The Lords of Council and Session, considering that the causes which called for the
increases of Fees granted temporarily in the Acts of Sederunt set forth in the Schedule
hereto annexed still hold good, and it is therefore expedient that the increased Fees
therein allowed be still continued, therefore enact and declare that the said Acts
of Sederunt shall be extended, and have full force and effect down to and including
318t October 1926.

And the Lords appoint this Act to be entered in the Books of Sederunt, and to
be printed and published in common form.


SCHEDULE REFERRED TO. 1. Act of Sederunt amending C.A.S., Book M, Chap. iii., anent Fees in Civil

Business for Sheriff Officers in Scotland, dated 22nd October 1919. 2. Act of Sederunt amending C.A.S., Book M, Chap. v., section 2 and Schedule B,

anent Fees payable to Clerks of the Peace under the Licensing (Scotland)

Act, 1903, or otherwise, dated 19th November 1919. 3. Act of Sederunt amending C.A.S., Book M, Chap. V., section 1 and Schedule

A, anent Fees payable to Town-Clerks under the Licensing (Scotland) Acts,

1903, or otherwise, dated 26th February 1920. 4. Act of Sederunt amending C.A.S., Book A, Chap. ix., section 4, anent Fees

payable to Messengers-at-Arms, dated 1st June 1920. 5. Act of Sederunt authorising a further temporary increase in Fees under

C.A.S., Book K, Chap. iv., and C.A.S., Book M, Chap. ii., dated 20th July

1920. 6. Act of Sederunt further amending C.A.S., Book M, Chap. V., section 2 and

Schedule B, anent Fees payable to Clerks of the Peace under the Licensing

(Scotland) Act, 1903, or otherwise, dated 8th July 1921. 7. Act of Sederunt further amending C.A.S., Book M, Chap. v., section 1 and

Schedule A, anent Fees payable to Town-Clerks under the Licensing (Scotland) Act, 1903, dated 21st June 1922.




The Lords of Council and Session having taken into consideration the terms of section 2 (1) (a) of the Church of Scotland (Property and Endowments) Act, 1925, with reference to the ascertainment of the former county average value of the kinds of victual hereinafter mentioned, and also the terms of the First Schedule of the said Act, enact and declare as follows :

1. The former county average value (within the meaning of section 2 (1) of the said Act) of Wheat per quarter shall be deemed to be : (a) For the County of Caithness,

£2 0 0 (6) For the County of Orkney,

2 0 0 2. The former county average value (within the meaning of section 2 (1) of the said Act) of Oats per quarter shall be deemed to be :For the County of Orkney,

£1 0 3 3. The former county average value (within the meaning of section 2 (1) of the said Act) of Bear per quarter shall be deemed to be :(a) For the County of Berwick,

£l 10 8 (6) For the County of Clackmannan,

1 8 6 (c) For the County of Dumfries,

1 9 10 (d) For the County of Edinburgh or Midlothian,

1 10 11 (e) For the County of Elgin or Moray,

1 9 10 (f) For the County of Haddington or East Lothian

1 15 0 (9) For the County of Kinross, .

1 7 5 (h) For the County of Kirkcudbright,

1 9 5 (i) For the County of Lanark, .

1 10 5 ()) For the County of Linlithgow or West Lothian,

1 10 0 (1) For the County of Nairn,

1 9 10 (1) For the County of Peebles,

1 11 0 (m) For the County of Perth,

1 8 1 (n) For the County of Renfrew,

1 10 6 (0) For the County of Ross and Cromarty,

1 11 6 (p) For the County of Roxburgh,

1 9 9 (g) For the County of Selkirk, .

1 9 0 () For the County of Stirling,

1 9 6 And the Lords appoint this Act to be entered in the Books of Sederunt, and to be printed and published in common form.


[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »