Taylor v Marshalls Food Group [1998] ScotCS 60 (6 November 1998)

Taylor v Marshalls Food Group [1998] ScotCS 60 (6 November 1998)

A motion for an additional fee is incompetent after the Auditor has taxed the account and issued his report; the process of taxation is then at an end and cannot be reopened except by objection under Rule 42.4.

Citation
[1998] ScotCS 60
Parties
Pursuer: William Copland Taylor; Defenders: Marshalls Food Group
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages Action / Post Proof, Post Interlocutor, Motion for Additional Fee After Taxation of Expenses
Outcome
Motion for an additional fee refused as incompetent.
Legal Topics
Expenses, Additional Fee, Taxation of Costs
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Expenses Additional Fee Taxation of Costs

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

Parties

William Copland Taylor

Pursuer

Marshalls Food Group

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages Action / Post Proof, Post Interlocutor, Motion for Additional Fee After Taxation of Expenses

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a motion for an additional fee under Rule 42.14(1) is competent after the Auditor has taxed the account of expenses and issued his report

Ratio Decidendi

A motion for an additional fee is incompetent after the Auditor has taxed the account and issued his report; the process of taxation is then at an end and cannot be reopened except by objection under Rule 42.4.

Court Disposition

Motion for an additional fee refused as incompetent.

Orders

  • Refusal of pursuer's motion for an additional fee.