EASTERN MOTOR COMPANY LTD AGAINST (1) COLIN DONALD GRASSICK, (2) DAVID DOUGLAS GRASSIC AND (3) JANE HARTREE HAIG [2021] ScotCS CSIH_67 (17 December 2021)

EASTERN MOTOR COMPANY LTD AGAINST (1) COLIN DONALD GRASSICK, (2) DAVID DOUGLAS GRASSIC AND (3) JANE HARTREE HAIG [2021] ScotCS CSIH_67 (17 December 2021)

The expert acted within his remit and made no manifest error; the parties are bound by his determination. Challenges to such determinations can be raised ope exceptionis, but only manifest error or fraud will suffice to set aside the decision. No such error was established here.

Citation
[2021] ScotCS CSIH_67
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: Eastern Motor Company Limited; Defender and Reclaimer: Colin Donald Grassick; Defender and Reclaimer: David Douglas Grassick; Defender and Reclaimer: Jane Hartree Haig
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Inner House, Court of Session, Post Proof, Appeal From Commercial Judge
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor recalled and decree granted for pursuers.
Legal Topics
Expert Determination, Contractual Dispute Resolution, Manifest Error, Judicial Review, Reduction Ope Exceptionis
Contract Law Civil Procedure Expert Determination Contractual Dispute Resolution Manifest Error Judicial Review Reduction Ope Exceptionis

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eastern Motor Company Limited

Pursuers and Respondents

Colin Donald Grassick

Defender and Reclaimer

David Douglas Grassick

Defender and Reclaimer

Jane Hartree Haig

Defender and Reclaimer

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Inner House, Court of Session, Post Proof, Appeal From Commercial Judge

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can interfere with an expert determination under a contract except for manifest error or fraud
  2. 2 Whether a challenge to an expert determination must be brought by judicial review or can be raised ope exceptionis in defence

Ratio Decidendi

The expert acted within his remit and made no manifest error; the parties are bound by his determination. Challenges to such determinations can be raised ope exceptionis, but only manifest error or fraud will suffice to set aside the decision. No such error was established here.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor recalled and decree granted for pursuers.

Orders

  • Sustain pursuers' first, third and fourth pleas-in-law
  • Repel pursuers' second plea and defenders' pleas