Stiell Ltd v Riema Control Systems Ltd [2000] ScotCS 174 (23 June 2000)

Stiell Ltd v Riema Control Systems Ltd [2000] ScotCS 174 (23 June 2000)

The debt sued for by the pursuers was and remained a pure debt, not rendered contingent by the adjudicator's interim decision. The arrestments were therefore competent and should not be recalled. The contractual adjudication procedure did not create a condition precedent to payment, and the action merely constituted the debt which existed at the commencement of the case.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 174
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: Stiell Limited; Defenders and Appellants: Riema Control Systems Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 June 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sheriff Court (motion to Recall Arrestments) / Appellate (inner House, Court of Session)
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Arrestment on the Dependence, Adjudication Under Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996, Contingent and Pure Debts, Effect of Adjudicator's Decision, Security for Claims
Civil Procedure Construction Law Contract Law Arrestment on the Dependence Adjudication Under Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996 Contingent and Pure Debts Effect of Adjudicator's Decision Security for Claims

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stiell Limited

Pursuers and Respondents

Riema Control Systems Limited

Defenders and Appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sheriff Court (motion to Recall Arrestments) / Appellate (inner House, Court of Session)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the debt sued for became contingent following an adjudicator's decision under the 1996 Act
  2. 2 Whether arrestments on the dependence should be recalled as incompetent or as nimious and oppressive

Ratio Decidendi

The debt sued for by the pursuers was and remained a pure debt, not rendered contingent by the adjudicator's interim decision. The arrestments were therefore competent and should not be recalled. The contractual adjudication procedure did not create a condition precedent to payment, and the action merely constituted the debt which existed at the commencement of the case.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • Arrestments on the dependence to remain in place
  • Matter remitted to the Sheriff Court for further proceedings