Stewart & Anor v Pure Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSOH_49 (26 March 2008)

Stewart & Anor v Pure Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSOH_49 (26 March 2008)

The defenders' arguments on causation and contributory negligence fail because they are unsupported by sufficient averments or quantification, and contributory negligence is not a defence to a pure contract claim under Scots law. There is no relevant defence to the pursuers' claim.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_49
Parties
Pursuers: William Stewart and Jemima Stewart; Defenders: Pure Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
26 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Motion for Summary Decree
Outcome
Summary decree granted in favour of the pursuers.
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages, Causation, Contributory Negligence, Summary Decree
Contract Law Breach of Contract Damages Causation Contributory Negligence Summary Decree

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 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

William Stewart and Jemima Stewart

Pursuers

Pure Limited

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Motion for Summary Decree

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders have a relevant defence to the pursuers' claim for damages for breach of contract
  2. 2 Whether causation or contributory negligence provide a defence to the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders' arguments on causation and contributory negligence fail because they are unsupported by sufficient averments or quantification, and contributory negligence is not a defence to a pure contract claim under Scots law. There is no relevant defence to the pursuers' claim.

Court Disposition

Summary decree granted in favour of the pursuers.

Orders

  • Defenders to pay pursuers £55,893.00 plus interest (to be agreed)
  • Defenders to pay pursuers' expenses of the action