Thomson v. Newey & Eyre Ltd [2004] ScotCS 163 (02 July 2004)

Thomson v. Newey & Eyre Ltd [2004] ScotCS 163 (02 July 2004)

The court held that the pursuer had ample time and advice to raise the personal injury claim before the expiry of the triennium, and the circumstances did not make it just and equitable to allow the time-barred claim to proceed under section 19A. The economic loss claim could proceed. The defenders' pleadings against the first third party were held to have sufficient specification.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 163
Parties
Pursuer: James Thomson; Defender: Newey & Eyre Limited; First Third Party: First Third Party (not named); Second Third Party: Second Third Party (not named)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Damages (breach of Contract and Personal Injury) / Procedure Roll Debate; Interlocutory Decision on Time Bar and Specification
Outcome
Personal injury claim struck out as time-barred; economic loss claim to proceed to proof before answer.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Personal Injury (stress/anxiety), Sequestration, Prescription and Limitation (scotland) Act 1973, Section 17 and 19 a Discretion, Specification of Pleadings
Contract Law Tort/delict Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Personal Injury (stress/anxiety) Sequestration Prescription and Limitation (scotland) Act 1973 Section 17 and 19 a Discretion +1 more

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 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Thomson

Pursuer

Newey & Eyre Limited

Defender

First Third Party (not named)

First Third Party

Second Third Party (not named)

Second Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Damages (breach of Contract and Personal Injury) / Procedure Roll Debate; Interlocutory Decision on Time Bar and Specification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's personal injury claim is time-barred under section 17 of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 and if it should be allowed to proceed under section 19A discretion
  2. 2 Whether the defenders' pleadings against the first third party lack sufficient specification

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the pursuer had ample time and advice to raise the personal injury claim before the expiry of the triennium, and the circumstances did not make it just and equitable to allow the time-barred claim to proceed under section 19A. The economic loss claim could proceed. The defenders' pleadings against the first third party were held to have sufficient specification.

Court Disposition

Personal injury claim struck out as time-barred; economic loss claim to proceed to proof before answer.

Orders

  • All averments relating to personal injuries in Condescendence Four deleted.
  • Pursuer's fourth plea-in-law repelled.