Mack v. Glasgow City Council [2005] ScotSC 49 (04 August 2005)

Mack v. Glasgow City Council [2005] ScotSC 49 (04 August 2005)

A claim for inconvenience in a breach of contract action is not a claim for personal injury under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973. Therefore, the five-year prescription period applies, not the three-year limitation for personal injury. The sheriff erred in excluding the averments as time-barred personal injury claims.

Citation
[2005] ScotSC 49
Parties
Pursuer/appellant: Angela Mack; Defender/respondent: Glasgow City Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 August 2005
Procedural Posture
Action of Damages for Breach of Contract / Appeal Against Interlocutor Excluding Averments From Probation on Time Bar Grounds
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sheriff's interlocutor recalled to the extent it excluded averments of inconvenience; proof before answer allowed on whole pleadings; expenses of appeal awarded to appellant; appeal certified as suitable for junior counsel.
Legal Topics
Damages for Inconvenience, Prescription and Limitation, Distinction Between Personal Injury and Inconvenience, Proof Before Answer
Contract Law Housing Law Civil Procedure Damages for Inconvenience Prescription and Limitation Distinction Between Personal Injury and Inconvenience Proof Before Answer

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 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Angela Mack

Pursuer/appellant

Glasgow City Council

Defender/respondent

Procedural Posture

Action of Damages for Breach of Contract / Appeal Against Interlocutor Excluding Averments From Probation on Time Bar Grounds

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim for inconvenience in a breach of contract action constitutes a claim for personal injury under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in excluding averments of inconvenience as time-barred personal injury claims

Ratio Decidendi

A claim for inconvenience in a breach of contract action is not a claim for personal injury under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973. Therefore, the five-year prescription period applies, not the three-year limitation for personal injury. The sheriff erred in excluding the averments as time-barred personal injury claims.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sheriff's interlocutor recalled to the extent it excluded averments of inconvenience; proof before answer allowed on whole pleadings; expenses of appeal awarded to appellant; appeal certified as suitable for junior counsel.

Orders

  • Recall of interlocutor sustaining respondents' seventh plea in law and excluding first eleven lines of article 7 from probation
  • Repel respondents' second plea in law by consent