Kinloch v Kinloch (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 39 (14 November 2025)

Kinloch v Kinloch (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 39 (14 November 2025)

The sheriff's assessment of credibility and reliability was reasoned and justified; there was no error in requiring proper accounting from the appellant as executor; the sums paid to Cragwell Finance Company Ltd were properly added to the estate; the award of expenses was within the sheriff's discretion; and refusal of the amendment was justified as the appellant had already accepted the duty to account.

Citation
[2025] SACCIV 39
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Albert Kinloch as Executor-Nominate for the late Patricia Kinloch; Defender and Appellant: Douglas Ferry Kinloch as Executor-Nominate for the late John Woods Ferry
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff's Decision After Proof
Outcome
Appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor varied for clarity; expenses of appeal awarded to respondent; sanction for junior counsel granted.
Legal Topics
Executors' Duties, Accounting of Estate, Credibility of Witnesses, Award of Expenses, Amendment of Pleadings
Trusts and Estates Civil Procedure Executors' Duties Accounting of Estate Credibility of Witnesses Award of Expenses Amendment of Pleadings

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Albert Kinloch as Executor-Nominate for the late Patricia Kinloch

Pursuer and Respondent

Douglas Ferry Kinloch as Executor-Nominate for the late John Woods Ferry

Defender and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff's Decision After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in assessing the credibility and reliability of witnesses
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in requiring strict accounting from a lay executor
  3. 3 Whether sums paid to a company owned by the appellant should be added to the estate

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff's assessment of credibility and reliability was reasoned and justified; there was no error in requiring proper accounting from the appellant as executor; the sums paid to Cragwell Finance Company Ltd were properly added to the estate; the award of expenses was within the sheriff's discretion; and refusal of the amendment was justified as the appellant had already accepted the duty to account.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor varied for clarity; expenses of appeal awarded to respondent; sanction for junior counsel granted.

Orders

  • Sheriff's interlocutor of 3 October 2024 varied to specify payment of £45,254.84 together with net sale proceeds from 534 Centrica plc shares, 428 Lloyds plc shares, and 48 United Utilities plc shares.
  • Sheriff's interlocutor of 11 November 2024 adhered to.