Thomas Barbour against Marion McEwan (Sheriff Court Civil) [2025] SCGLA 46 (03 July 2025)

Thomas Barbour against Marion McEwan (Sheriff Court Civil) [2025] SCGLA 46 (03 July 2025)

The pleadings, though omitting explicit reference to section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006, were always substantively based on that provision. The amendment to specify the statutory basis does not fundamentally change the case and is permissible even after expiry of the statutory time limit. The pleadings set forth a relevant and sufficiently specific claim under section 28, and the defender suffers no material prejudice from the amendment.

Citation
[2025] SCGLA 46
Parties
Pursuer: Thomas Barbour; Defender: Marion McEwan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Amendment and Relevancy
Outcome
Defender's fourth plea-in-law repelled; amendment allowed; cause appointed to procedural hearing.
Legal Topics
Financial Provision on Separation, Cohabitation, Pleadings and Amendment, Statutory Interpretation
Family Law Financial Provision on Separation Cohabitation Pleadings and Amendment Statutory Interpretation

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

Parties

Thomas Barbour

Pursuer

Marion McEwan

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Amendment and Relevancy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to specify statutory basis (section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006) renders the pleadings incompetent or irrelevant
  2. 2 Whether amendment to specify statutory basis after expiry of limitation period is permissible
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings as they stand set forth a relevant claim under section 28

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings, though omitting explicit reference to section 28 of the Family Law (Scotland) Act 2006, were always substantively based on that provision. The amendment to specify the statutory basis does not fundamentally change the case and is permissible even after expiry of the statutory time limit. The pleadings set forth a relevant and sufficiently specific claim under section 28, and the defender suffers no material prejudice from the amendment.

Court Disposition

Defender's fourth plea-in-law repelled; amendment allowed; cause appointed to procedural hearing.

Orders

  • Repels the fourth plea-in-law for the defender
  • Allows the record to be opened, amended in terms of the pursuer's minute of amendment, as adjusted, and closed of new