Date of Decision: 3 Mar 1772
Abstract: Richardson, pursuer, and Fenwick, defender, both seek to collect on payments originally from John Bedford and Son, an English firm. Due to financial trouble, checks endorsed by John Bedford and Son cannot be cashed. Instead, Richardson and Fenwick seek to collect from several Scottish firms that owed money to John Bedford and Son. Under a "letter of arrestment ad jurisdictionem fundandam," a creditor can bring a foreign debtor's property under the jurisdiction of the Scottish court. In this case the foreign debtor's property is debt. Richardson and Fenwick dispute who has priority to these debts. Fenwick alleges that Richardson's procedure for authorizing letters of arrestment was irregular and therefore ineffective. Richardson disputes Fenwick's claim, and further argues that Fenwick incorrectly identified the debtor as Bedford and Son instead of John Bedford and Son.
Subjects: Arrestment, Arrestment, Competition between Creditors, Debt

Published Report

William Morison, The Decisions of the Court of Session (1811), 678

Litigants

Pursuer:
William Richardson
Defender:
Martin Fenwick

People or Organizations Associated with Case

Named in case documents:
Samuel Paton
John Bedford and Son, Debtor
Colin McLaren
Lord Ordinary:
Lord Hailes

Organizations

Case Locations (People)

Case Locations (Case)