It might be expected that, after the lodging of the answers and pleas in law on the part of the defender, a brief period would now be allowed the pursuer to put in a reply to any affirmative allegations contained in the defender's pleading. But this is not the case, at least in the sense of his lodging a separate pleading. He is given opportunity to reply, but by way of revising his condescendence. Basically, the principle is the same as that obtaining in our classic chancery practice, whereby the complainant amended his bill in order to include any special replication. Here, however, the incorporation of the reply comes about not by an amendment, but in the course of an episode in the pleadings which permits a greater or less measure of change in the allegations of both parties in general, that is to say, either in the course of a revisal of the record or the adjustment of the record. Occasionally, indeed, a pursuer will be required by order of the court to answer allegations of the defender, but this does not alter the general mode of formulation. It will be convenient, here again, to deal separately with the two jurisdictions.
Robert W. Millar,
CIVIL PLEADING IN SCOTLAND,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol30/iss5/5