Cairns v. The Chief Constable Strathclyde Police [2004] ScotCS 235 (22 October 2004)

The appellant's pleadings are hopelessly irrelevant and devoid of merit; therefore, requiring caution does not amount to a denial of justice, but the amount should be reduced to £5,000 based on the estimated length of the hearing.

Citation: [2004] ScotCS 235
Parties: Pursuer and Appellant: Edward Edelsten Cairns; Defender and Respondent: The Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 22 October 2004
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Motion for Caution Pending Appeal
Outcome: Appellant ordered to find caution for expenses as a condition of proceeding with the appeal.
Legal Topics: Caution for Expenses, Bankruptcy and Litigation, Access to Justice

Civil Procedure Caution for Expenses Bankruptcy and Litigation Access to Justice

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

Edward Edelsten Cairns

Pursuer and Appellant

The Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Motion for Caution Pending Appeal

Legal Issues

1 Whether an undischarged bankrupt appellant should be ordered to find caution for expenses
2 Whether the appellant's action is devoid of merit so as to justify an order for caution
3 Whether requiring caution would amount to a denial of justice under Article 6 ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appellant ordered to find caution for expenses as a condition of proceeding with the appeal.

Orders

Appellant to find caution in the sum of £5,000 in respect of expenses of the appeal, to be lodged within 28 days.