Adams v Young & Anor [2001] ScotCS 12 (19 January 2001)

Adams v Young & Anor [2001] ScotCS 12 (19 January 2001)

The pursuer is entitled to proof before answer on his averments of fraudulent misrepresentation, as they are sufficiently specific and relevant to warrant inquiry. However, he has no title to claim for losses sustained by third parties (his father or sister) after he disposed of the property. The involvement and potential liability of the second defender also require proof.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 12
Parties
Pursuer: Peter John Richard Adams; Defender: John Young; Defender: Jonathan Charles Smith
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 January 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil Action (fraudulent Misrepresentation in Property Sale) / Procedure Roll (plea to Relevancy and Title to Sue)
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed except as to averments of loss sustained by third parties; those averments not remitted to probation.
Legal Topics
Fraudulent Misrepresentation, Title to Sue, Damages for Misrepresentation, Heritable Property, Remedial Works Liability
Property Law Contract Law Delict (tort) Fraudulent Misrepresentation Title to Sue Damages for Misrepresentation Heritable Property Remedial Works Liability

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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter John Richard Adams

Pursuer

John Young

Defender

Jonathan Charles Smith

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action (fraudulent Misrepresentation in Property Sale) / Procedure Roll (plea to Relevancy and Title to Sue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer has title and interest to sue for losses allegedly caused by fraudulent misrepresentation in the sale of heritable property
  2. 2 Whether the averments of fraudulent misrepresentation are sufficiently specific and relevant to entitle the pursuer to proof
  3. 3 Whether any loss was caused by the alleged misrepresentation, or by the pursuer's own or his solicitor's failure to investigate

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer is entitled to proof before answer on his averments of fraudulent misrepresentation, as they are sufficiently specific and relevant to warrant inquiry. However, he has no title to claim for losses sustained by third parties (his father or sister) after he disposed of the property. The involvement and potential liability of the second defender also require proof.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed except as to averments of loss sustained by third parties; those averments not remitted to probation.

Orders

  • Refuse to remit to probation the averments from '1998' at 22A to 'thereby' at 23D of the Closed Record
  • Quoad ultra allow a proof before answer