Moffat & Ors v Longmuir [2000] ScotCS 218 (4 August 2000)

Moffat & Ors v Longmuir [2000] ScotCS 218 (4 August 2000)

Notice of intention to purchase a deceased partner's share under Clause Tenth must be given to all persons capable of being appointed as executor or next-of-kin; notice to only one is insufficient. The diary entry did not constitute proper notice as it was not communicated to all representatives.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 218
Parties
Claimants and Respondents: Mrs. Margaret Moffat and Others; Respondent and Appellant: David Longmuir
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under Rule 41 of Rules of Court of Session 94 / Opinion of the Court on Case Stated by Arbiter
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; questions answered in favour of respondents.
Legal Topics
Dissolution of Partnership on Death, Interpretation of Partnership Agreement, Notice Requirements for Purchase of Deceased Partner's Share, Executors and Representatives in Intestacy
Partnership Law Succession Law Dissolution of Partnership on Death Interpretation of Partnership Agreement Notice Requirements for Purchase of Deceased Partner's Share Executors and Representatives in Intestacy

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs. Margaret Moffat and Others

Claimants and Respondents

David Longmuir

Respondent and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under Rule 41 of Rules of Court of Session 94 / Opinion of the Court on Case Stated by Arbiter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether notice of intention to purchase deceased partner's share must be given to all persons capable of being appointed as executor
  2. 2 Whether diary entry constituted sufficient notice to 'the representative' under Clause Tenth

Ratio Decidendi

Notice of intention to purchase a deceased partner's share under Clause Tenth must be given to all persons capable of being appointed as executor or next-of-kin; notice to only one is insufficient. The diary entry did not constitute proper notice as it was not communicated to all representatives.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; questions answered in favour of respondents.

Orders

  • First question answered in the affirmative: notice required to all capable executors.
  • Second question answered in the negative: diary entry not sufficient notice.