ALAN KING AGAINST BLACK HORSE LTD AND ANOTHER [2024] ScotCS CSIH_3 (31 January 2024)

ALAN KING AGAINST BLACK HORSE LTD AND ANOTHER [2024] ScotCS CSIH_3 (31 January 2024)

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 displaces the common law Ransan bar in consumer contracts. Continued use of goods after rejection does not automatically bar the consumer from exercising the right to reject or obtaining a refund. The Act envisages post-rejection use and provides for deduction for use, not forfeiture of rights. The Sheriff Appeal Court erred in applying an absolute bar and in granting summary decree of absolvitor without inquiry into the facts or the damages claim.

Citation
[2024] ScotCS CSIH_3
Parties
Pursuer and Appellant: Alan King; Defender and First Respondent: Black Horse Limited; Third Party and Second Respondent: Park's Ayr Limited; Interveners: Competition and Markets Authority
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 January 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Inner House, Court of Session (second Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Consumer Rights Act 2015, Right to Reject Goods, Hire Purchase Agreements, Personal Bar, Remedies for Breach of Contract
Consumer Law Contract Law Consumer Rights Act 2015 Right to Reject Goods Hire Purchase Agreements Personal Bar Remedies for Breach of Contract

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alan King

Pursuer and Appellant

Black Horse Limited

Defender and First Respondent

Park's Ayr Limited

Third Party and Second Respondent

Competition and Markets Authority

Interveners

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Inner House, Court of Session (second Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the common law bar on post-rejection use of goods (Ransan bar) survive under the Consumer Rights Act 2015?
  2. 2 Is a consumer automatically barred from insisting on the right to reject goods under the 2015 Act if they continue to use the goods after rejection?
  3. 3 Should summary decree of dismissal have been granted given the claim for common law damages?

Ratio Decidendi

The Consumer Rights Act 2015 displaces the common law Ransan bar in consumer contracts. Continued use of goods after rejection does not automatically bar the consumer from exercising the right to reject or obtaining a refund. The Act envisages post-rejection use and provides for deduction for use, not forfeiture of rights. The Sheriff Appeal Court erred in applying an absolute bar and in granting summary decree of absolvitor without inquiry into the facts or the damages claim.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Interlocutor of the Sheriff Appeal Court recalled
  • Interlocutors of the Sheriff dated 6 and 27 April 2022 recalled