MILLEER v CHIVAS BROTHERS LTD [2014] ScotCS CSIH_65 (11 July 2014)

MILLEER v CHIVAS BROTHERS LTD [2014] ScotCS CSIH_65 (11 July 2014)

A miscarriage of justice occurred because the sheriff failed to recognise the reasonable necessity of leading additional evidence after late disclosure of a key statement; the appellant was entitled to expenses for the whole procedure as the respondents' conduct caused the litigation to be unduly extended.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSIH_65
Parties
Pursuer and Appellant: Annette Miller; Defenders and Respondents: Chivas Brothers Ltd
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal on Expenses in Action of Reparation / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; interlocutor recalled; expenses awarded to appellant with 15% uplift, certification of Mr Peter Scott, and sanction for junior counsel.
Legal Topics
Expenses, Credibility of Evidence, Late Disclosure, Reparation
Civil Litigation Employment Law Expenses Credibility of Evidence Late Disclosure Reparation

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

Annette Miller

Pursuer and Appellant

Chivas Brothers Ltd

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal on Expenses in Action of Reparation / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in exercising discretion on expenses following late disclosure of a key statement
  2. 2 Whether leading additional evidence was necessary or could have been replaced by a joint minute
  3. 3 Whether a miscarriage of justice occurred in the apportionment of expenses

Ratio Decidendi

A miscarriage of justice occurred because the sheriff failed to recognise the reasonable necessity of leading additional evidence after late disclosure of a key statement; the appellant was entitled to expenses for the whole procedure as the respondents' conduct caused the litigation to be unduly extended.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; interlocutor recalled; expenses awarded to appellant with 15% uplift, certification of Mr Peter Scott, and sanction for junior counsel.

Orders

  • Recall interlocutor of 17 June 2013
  • Award expenses in favour of appellant with 15% uplift