Legal action - Hood v. Coatbridge Oil Co., 1879
type: Companies - litigation
Hood v. Coatbridge Oil Co.
To-day counsel were heard on a reclaiming note by Archibald Hood, coalmaster, Rosewell Street, Edinburgh, from a decision of Lord-Ordinary Clark. Some time ago the Coatbridge Oil Company raised an action against the appellant and defender in which the pursuers sought to have the defender ordained to implement a contract of sale.
For the Oil Company was alleged that on September 1877 they offered to sell to the defender the plant of their works at Coatbridge for the sum of £7,000, twelve months being allowed for the removal of the plant. By telegram dated 11th October 1877 the defender accepted the offer, and of the same date confirmed the telegram by letter. On 15th October the pursuers wrote confirming the acceptance their offer.
For the defender it was contended that throughout the negotiations he acted as a Director of the Capeldrae Oil Company (Limited), Fife. It was proposed by certain gentlemen interested that Company that oil refining should carried on as well as manufacturing crude oil, and for that purpose it was agreed to reconstruct the Capeldrae Oil Company, and to get the shareholders to advance the amount for acquiring the necessary additional plant. It was further maintained that the terms of sale were never completed and adjusted, and there was no final or concluded contract between the parties. Further, the pursuers were throughout aware that the defender had no interest in the matter other than Director or shareholder of the Oil Company. The negotiations between the parties interested having been dependent the successful reconstruction the Company by whom the plant was to acquired and used, was contended that the defender was entitled to break off the negotiations, on the reconstruction having failed, without incurring any personal liability in the matter. In December last the Lord-Ordinary decerned against Mr Hood, with expenses. A reclaiming note for the defender was presented to the First Division, and afterwards transferred to the Second Division, and to day, after hearing counsel, their Lordships affirmed the judgment of the Lord-Ordinary, and found the defender liable in additional expenses.
The Dundee Advertiser, 29th October 1879