Moor Row Ltd v DWF LLP [2017] ScotCS CSOH_63 (07 April 2017)

Moor Row Ltd v DWF LLP [2017] ScotCS CSOH_63 (07 April 2017)

The pursuer's claim for damages is not relevantly pled because neither the pursuer nor the head landlord has carried out the remedial works or incurred any loss, and the lease provisions do not create a contractual right to payment absent actual loss. The indemnity claim is also irrelevant and/or premature as no liability to the head landlord had crystallised at the time the action was raised. The action is therefore dismissed as irrelevant and/or premature.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSOH_63
Parties
Pursuer: Moor Row Limited; Defender: DWF LLP
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action (damages and Indemnity Claim) / Debate on Relevancy and Competency (pleadings Challenge)
Outcome
Action dismissed as irrelevant and/or premature
Legal Topics
Dilapidations, Repairing Obligations, Indemnity Clauses, Measure of Damages, Prematurity of Action
Commercial Law Landlord and Tenant Law Contract Law Dilapidations Repairing Obligations Indemnity Clauses Measure of Damages Prematurity of Action

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Moor Row Limited

Pursuer

DWF LLP

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action (damages and Indemnity Claim) / Debate on Relevancy and Competency (pleadings Challenge)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer has relevant averments for a claim in damages for breach of repairing obligations under the lease
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer has relevant averments for a claim based on the indemnity clause
  3. 3 Whether the action is premature in the absence of actual loss or liability incurred by the pursuer

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's claim for damages is not relevantly pled because neither the pursuer nor the head landlord has carried out the remedial works or incurred any loss, and the lease provisions do not create a contractual right to payment absent actual loss. The indemnity claim is also irrelevant and/or premature as no liability to the head landlord had crystallised at the time the action was raised. The action is therefore dismissed as irrelevant and/or premature.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed as irrelevant and/or premature

Orders

  • Defender's pleas to relevancy and competency sustained
  • Action dismissed