MARSHALL NEIL CRAIG RONALD AGAINST THE DUKE OF BUCCLEUCH [2014] ScotCS CSOH_101 (19 June 2014)

The pursuer's case is not bound to fail on the grounds of lack of actual authority or illegality/public policy at this stage; the issues require proof before answer.

Citation: [2014] ScotCS CSOH_101
Parties: Pursuer: Marshall Neil Craig Ronald; Defender: The Duke of Buccleuch
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 19 June 2014
Procedural Posture: Civil / Procedure Roll Discussion on Relevancy and Specification, Preliminary Pleas
Outcome: Proof before answer allowed; defender's preliminary plea reserved; all questions of expenses reserved.
Legal Topics: Authority of Agent, Illegality of Contract, Public Policy in Contract Enforcement, Extortion, Ostensible Authority

Contract Law Criminal Law Public Policy Authority of Agent Illegality of Contract Public Policy in Contract Enforcement Extortion Ostensible Authority

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

Marshall Neil Craig Ronald

Pursuer

The Duke of Buccleuch

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Procedure Roll Discussion on Relevancy and Specification, Preliminary Pleas

Legal Issues

1 Whether John Craig had actual authority to bind the defender to the agreement for payment of £4.25 million
2 Whether the agreement is unenforceable due to illegality or public policy

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's case is not bound to fail on the grounds of lack of actual authority or illegality/public policy at this stage; the issues require proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed; defender's preliminary plea reserved; all questions of expenses reserved.

Orders

Allow proof before answer
Reserve defender's preliminary plea