BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you
consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, 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!
You are here:BAILII >>
Databases >>
Scottish Court of Session Decisions >>
James Bell v Isobel King. [1797] Mor 16786 (21 January 1797)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1797/Mor3816786-210.html Cite as:
[1797] Mor 16786
The defender, in an action of divorce, cannot adduce her mother, brother, or sister, as witnesses.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
In an action of divorce, at the instance of James Bell, against Isobel King, she proposed to adduce her mother, brother, and sister, as witnesses. She wished, in particular, to disprove a material circumstance, sworn to by a single witness for the pursuer, which she alleged to be false, and her brother was the only person who had access to know it to be so.
The pursuer having opposed the examination of these witnesses, the Commissaries “sustained the objection.”
The defender presented a bill of advocation against the judgment, which the Lord Ordinary took to report.
The Court thought the interlocutor of the Commissaries right. The opinions delivered were the same in substance with those stated in the report, 10th July 1790, Dalziel against Richmond, No. 205. p. 16780. It was also observed, that the fact which the defender was desirous of disproving by her brother's evidence being sworn to by one witness only, could not materially injure her cause.
The Lords unanimously refused the bill.
Act. Solicitor-General Blair, G. J. Bell.Alt. Fletcher.Clerk, Menzies.
Fac. Coll. No. 12. p. 24.
