Leanne McGunnigal against David Pollock (Sheriff Court Civil) [2025] SCFAL 15 (12 March 2025)

Leanne McGunnigal against David Pollock (Sheriff Court Civil) [2025] SCFAL 15 (12 March 2025)

The pursuer's claim for unjustified enrichment was not relevantly or sufficiently distinctly pled from the time-barred statutory claim under section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006. The pleadings failed to specify actual loss or quantifiable enrichment, rendering the claim irrelevant and lacking in specification. Accordingly, the defender's preliminary plea was sustained and the action dismissed.

Citation
[2025] SCFAL 15
Parties
Pursuer: Leanne McGunnigal; Defender: David Pollock
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Family Action (cohabitants' Property and Enrichment) / Judgment After Debate on Relevancy and Specification
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Cohabitants' Property Rights, Unjustified Enrichment, Recompense, Time Bar, Specification of Pleadings
Family Law Civil Procedure Unjustified Enrichment Cohabitants' Property Rights Recompense Time Bar Specification 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leanne McGunnigal

Pursuer

David Pollock

Defender

Procedural Posture

Family Action (cohabitants' Property and Enrichment) / Judgment After Debate on Relevancy and Specification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim for unjustified enrichment can proceed where a statutory claim under section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006 is time-barred
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's pleadings disclose a relevant and sufficiently specified case of unjustified enrichment distinct from the statutory claim

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's claim for unjustified enrichment was not relevantly or sufficiently distinctly pled from the time-barred statutory claim under section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006. The pleadings failed to specify actual loss or quantifiable enrichment, rendering the claim irrelevant and lacking in specification. Accordingly, the defender's preliminary plea was sustained and the action dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Defender's fourth plea in law sustained
  • Pursuer's fourth plea in law repelled