★ Find a new page to transcribe in our list of Untranscribed Manuscripts
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
with it be, by the statement of the Applicant sufficiently established.</p> | with it be, by the statement of the Applicant sufficiently established.</p> | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE --> | ||
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{ | {{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}} |
1823. Decr. 12
Constitutional Code
4. Counter-evidence sufficient admitted.
5. If, admitting the past existence of a collative state of things
or event, any state of things appears to have having
in relation to the demand in question according to some
ordinance of the law the effect of an ablative state of
things appears to have had place either at or after the time
of the existence such collative state of things or event.
6. If, admitting the existence of an adequate collative
event as above, and the non-existence of any ablative
event, a counter-demand as appears yet a defendant
there is in whose favour on whose part a counter-demand has place
is in the having in relation to the demand in question
the effect of being in value relation to it equal or superior
or equal in value.
Art. 3. If he sustains the demand the Judge will in and
by his opinative decree make known and cause in the record
ready made in a form as concise as possible, the ground
on which as above he sustains it. The applicant is
in this case constituted pursuer: every person at whose charge the demands
sustained, a defendant.
Art. 4. So If he dismisses the demand, the with in like
manner grounds on which he dismisses rejects it.
7. If admitting the justice of the demand under all the
above hears taken together the justice of the demand seems
probable, state of the vexation and expence attached
to the attendance on the part of the proposed Defendant or such
appears to be such as to be preponderant over the suffering
resulting from the non-receipt of the service demanded
the Judge may dismiss the demand, unless on the part of
proposed Defendant, the existence of a refusal, declared or virtual to comply
with it be, by the statement of the Applicant sufficiently established.
Identifier: | JB/055/230/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 55. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1823-12-12 |
2 continued, 3-4 |
||
055 |
Constitutional Code; Procedure Code |
||
230 |
Constitutional Code |
||
001 |
|||
Text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
C8 / E4 |
||
J WHATMAN TURKEY MILL 1823 |
|||
Jonathan Blenman |
|||
1823 |
|||
17951 |
|||