Harris v. Foubister [2006] ScotSC 62 (14 July 2006)

Harris v. Foubister [2006] ScotSC 62 (14 July 2006)

The pursuer's statement of claim and lodged productions gave the defender fair notice of the claim, including extras and amended drawings. The defender's objections to evidence were unfounded as the pleadings and documents incorporated provided adequate record for the evidence led. The only defence was set-off for alleged breach, which the defender failed to prove, having led no evidence. The sheriff was correct to admit the evidence and grant decree for the pursuer.

Citation
[2006] ScotSC 62
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Duncan Harris; Defender and Appellant: Robert Foubister
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Summary Cause (civil) / Appeal From Sheriff to Sheriff Principal
Outcome
Appeal refused; decree of sheriff adhered to.
Legal Topics
Building Contracts, Sub Contractor Claims, Set Off and Counterclaim, Summary Cause Rules, Specification and Relevancy of Pleadings
Contract Law Civil Procedure Building Contracts Sub Contractor Claims Set Off and Counterclaim Summary Cause Rules Specification and Relevancy of Pleadings

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

Parties

Duncan Harris

Pursuer and Respondent

Robert Foubister

Defender and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Summary Cause (civil) / Appeal From Sheriff to Sheriff Principal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer gave fair notice of his claim and evidence to the defender
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in admitting evidence regarding extra works and contract termination circumstances
  3. 3 Whether the defender was entitled to withhold payment for alleged breach by the pursuer

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's statement of claim and lodged productions gave the defender fair notice of the claim, including extras and amended drawings. The defender's objections to evidence were unfounded as the pleadings and documents incorporated provided adequate record for the evidence led. The only defence was set-off for alleged breach, which the defender failed to prove, having led no evidence. The sheriff was correct to admit the evidence and grant decree for the pursuer.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; decree of sheriff adhered to.

Orders

  • Defender to pay pursuer £1,450 as principal sum.
  • Defender to pay pursuer £2,654 as expenses.