Kelvin Homes Ltd v. Ritchie Brothers Public Works Contractors Ltd [2005] ScotSC 45 (27 July 2005)

Kelvin Homes Ltd v. Ritchie Brothers Public Works Contractors Ltd [2005] ScotSC 45 (27 July 2005)

Averments that are wholly lacking in specification or are irrelevant must be excluded from probation. Claims for anticipated or prospective losses may proceed if they are reasonably anticipated and adequately specified, but in this case, the pursuers' averments regarding management time and anticipated losses were too vague and speculative to proceed to proof.

Citation
[2005] ScotSC 45
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Kelvin Homes Limited; Defender and Appellant: Ritchie Brothers Public Works Contractors Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Appeal in Action of Damages for Breach of Contract / Interlocutory Appeal Following Debate on Relevancy and Specification of Pleadings
Outcome
Appeal sustained in part; interlocutor of 19 October 2004 recalled; certain averments excluded from probation; proof before answer allowed on remaining averments; all questions of expenses reserved.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Specification of Pleadings, Damages, Probation of Averments
Contract Law Civil Procedure Breach of Contract Specification of Pleadings Damages Probation of Averments

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 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kelvin Homes Limited

Pursuer and Respondent

Ritchie Brothers Public Works Contractors Limited

Defender and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal in Action of Damages for Breach of Contract / Interlocutory Appeal Following Debate on Relevancy and Specification of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether certain averments in the pursuer's pleadings are irrelevant or lacking in specification and should be excluded from probation
  2. 2 Whether claims for anticipated or prospective losses are sufficiently specified to proceed to proof

Ratio Decidendi

Averments that are wholly lacking in specification or are irrelevant must be excluded from probation. Claims for anticipated or prospective losses may proceed if they are reasonably anticipated and adequately specified, but in this case, the pursuers' averments regarding management time and anticipated losses were too vague and speculative to proceed to proof.

Court Disposition

Appeal sustained in part; interlocutor of 19 October 2004 recalled; certain averments excluded from probation; proof before answer allowed on remaining averments; all questions of expenses reserved.

Orders

  • Recall of interlocutor dated 19 October 2004
  • Exclusion from probation of the 10th sentence of condescendence 4 and the 9th to 12th sentences of condescendence 5