Rolf Napoli v. Lucy Stone [2009] ScotSC 25 (16 September 2009)
The dismissal of a counterclaim does not constitute a final judgment as it does not dispose of the subject-matter of the cause as a whole, nor does it address the question of expenses; therefore, the appeal is incompetent under section 38 of the 1971 Act.
- Citation
- [2009] ScotSC 25
- Parties
- Pursuer and Respondent: Rolf Napoli; Defender and Appellant: Lucy Stone
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 16 September 2009
- Procedural Posture
- Small Claim / Appeal Against Dismissal of Counterclaim Prior to Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed as incompetent
- Legal Topics
- Competency of Appeal, Final Judgment, Counterclaim Dismissal, Sheriff Courts (scotland) Act 1971, Small Claim Rules
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rolf Napoli
Pursuer and Respondent
Lucy Stone
Defender and Appellant
Procedural Posture
Small Claim / Appeal Against Dismissal of Counterclaim Prior to Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the dismissal of a counterclaim in a small claim constitutes a final judgment permitting appeal under section 38 of the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971
Ratio Decidendi
The dismissal of a counterclaim does not constitute a final judgment as it does not dispose of the subject-matter of the cause as a whole, nor does it address the question of expenses; therefore, the appeal is incompetent under section 38 of the 1971 Act.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed as incompetent
Orders
- Defender and appellant found liable to pursuer and respondent in expenses of the appeal, to be assessed by the sheriff clerk.
- Cause remitted to the sheriff to proceed as accords.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment