Auchnie v Auchnie [2014] ScotCS CSIH_102 (21 November 2014)

Auchnie v Auchnie [2014] ScotCS CSIH_102 (21 November 2014)

The interlocutor refusing to sist the minuter as a party was not a final judgment in a separate cause or in the principal action, and thus not appealable without leave. The sheriff did not err in exercising discretion to refuse the sist, given the minuter's knowledge of proceedings and delay in seeking to enter the process.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSIH_102
Parties
Minuter and Appellant: Mary Jeanie Diane Auchnie or Willox; Pursuer and Respondent: William John Auchnie; Pursuer and Respondent: Henry Auchnie; Defender: Duncan Henry James Auchnie; Defender: George Alan Auchnie
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Sheriff Court (civil, Succession/estate Administration) / Appeal on Competency and Merits of Refusal to Sist as Party Minuter
Outcome
Appeal dismissed as incompetent; even if competent, would have been refused on merits.
Legal Topics
Executry, Estate Administration, Sist of Parties, Appeal Competency, Res Judicata
Succession Law Civil Procedure Executry Estate Administration Sist of Parties Appeal Competency Res Judicata

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Jeanie Diane Auchnie or Willox

Minuter and Appellant

William John Auchnie

Pursuer and Respondent

Henry Auchnie

Pursuer and Respondent

Duncan Henry James Auchnie

Defender

George Alan Auchnie

Defender

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Sheriff Court (civil, Succession/estate Administration) / Appeal on Competency and Merits of Refusal to Sist as Party Minuter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether refusal to sist the minuter as a party is a final judgment permitting appeal without leave
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing to sist the minuter as a party to the action

Ratio Decidendi

The interlocutor refusing to sist the minuter as a party was not a final judgment in a separate cause or in the principal action, and thus not appealable without leave. The sheriff did not err in exercising discretion to refuse the sist, given the minuter's knowledge of proceedings and delay in seeking to enter the process.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed as incompetent; even if competent, would have been refused on merits.