Roberts v. Chisholm [2004] ScotCS 188 (30 July 2004)

Roberts v. Chisholm [2004] ScotCS 188 (30 July 2004)

It is competent for the court to exercise its dispensing power under rule 2.1 to grant relief from the consequences of the instance falling under rule 43.3(2) due to oversight, where the failure is excusable and consistent with the aims of the personal injuries rules.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 188
Parties
Pursuer: Philip Raymond Roberts; Defender: Samuel Chisholm
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
30 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injuries Action / Interlocutory Application for Relief From Failure to Lodge Summons for Calling Within Prescribed Period
Outcome
Relief granted under rule 2.1; period for lodging summons for calling extended until 7 September 2004; pursuer's motion under section 1 of the Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 refused as incompetent at this stage.
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Service of Summons, Court Dispensing Power, Personal Injuries Rules
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Extension of Time Service of Summons Court Dispensing Power Personal Injuries Rules

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Philip Raymond Roberts

Pursuer

Samuel Chisholm

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injuries Action / Interlocutory Application for Relief From Failure to Lodge Summons for Calling Within Prescribed Period

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court can grant relief under rule 2.1 after the instance has fallen due to failure to lodge summons for calling within three months and a day under rule 43.3(2)
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's motion for information under section 1 of the Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 is competent before service of summons

Ratio Decidendi

It is competent for the court to exercise its dispensing power under rule 2.1 to grant relief from the consequences of the instance falling under rule 43.3(2) due to oversight, where the failure is excusable and consistent with the aims of the personal injuries rules.

Court Disposition

Relief granted under rule 2.1; period for lodging summons for calling extended until 7 September 2004; pursuer's motion under section 1 of the Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 refused as incompetent at this stage.

Orders

  • Extension of period for lodging summons for calling until 7 September 2004 granted.
  • Pursuer's motion for information under section 1 of the Administration of Justice (Scotland) Act 1972 refused.