To ask the Scottish Executive, further to the answer to question S1W-15753 by Mr Jim Wallace on 11 July 2001, whether it supports the use by the Scottish Law Commission in its report on Boundary Division Walls (Report No. 163, paragraph 1.4, footnote 6) of the case of Robertson v Scott 1886 (13R 1127) as being central to its opinion that that case changed the law on march fence type divisions when it concerned a common or mutual gable and when the only question which was put before the court in that case, and the only decision given by the court, was that as a predecessor of a later builder had paid the cost of half the wall, that later builder was entitled to get back a payment he had made by mistake on beginning to use the gable, and what recognition it has given to this decision which established that the wall in question was legally held as common or mutual property "pro indiviso", as confirmed by Professor Bell in Principles of the Law of Scotland...