Tods Murray WS v McNamara (Arakin Ltd) [2014] ScotCS CSIH_106 (05 December 2014)

Tods Murray WS v McNamara (Arakin Ltd) [2014] ScotCS CSIH_106 (05 December 2014)

The defender's liability to the pursuers for a balance of fees was finally determined by the interlocutor of 14 February 2012, which was unsuccessfully reclaimed and not appealed further. No evidential basis or procedural mechanism exists to reopen that determination in the current motion. The defender's arguments regarding new matters and alleged errors do not justify a sist or refusal of expenses. The pursuers are entitled to expenses as the successful party.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSIH_106
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: Tods Murray WS; Defender and Reclaimer: Andrew McNamara as assignee of Arakin Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (reclaiming Motion) / Post Judgment, Expenses Determination
Outcome
Defender's motion for sist refused; Pursuers' motion for expenses granted.
Legal Topics
Award of Expenses, Finality of Judgments, Reclaiming Motions, Sist of Proceedings
Civil Procedure Costs and Expenses Award of Expenses Finality of Judgments Reclaiming Motions Sist of Proceedings

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tods Murray WS

Pursuers and Respondents

Andrew McNamara as assignee of Arakin Limited

Defender and Reclaimer

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (reclaiming Motion) / Post Judgment, Expenses Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defender is entitled to a sist of proceedings pending further action or complaint
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers are entitled to expenses of the reclaiming motion and subsequent hearing
  3. 3 Whether alleged new matters (res noviter) affect the finality of the previous judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The defender's liability to the pursuers for a balance of fees was finally determined by the interlocutor of 14 February 2012, which was unsuccessfully reclaimed and not appealed further. No evidential basis or procedural mechanism exists to reopen that determination in the current motion. The defender's arguments regarding new matters and alleged errors do not justify a sist or refusal of expenses. The pursuers are entitled to expenses as the successful party.

Court Disposition

Defender's motion for sist refused; Pursuers' motion for expenses granted.

Orders

  • Refusal of defender's motion to sist proceedings
  • Award of expenses to pursuers for the reclaiming motion and hearing on 13 November 2014