Wright v Cotias Investments Inc [2000] ScotCS 78 (23 March 2000)

Wright v Cotias Investments Inc [2000] ScotCS 78 (23 March 2000)

The pursuer's pleadings did not disclose relevant averments of facility and circumvention, nor of a personal relationship with the principal debtor sufficient to invoke the Smith v Bank of Scotland principle. The pursuer had legal representation, and the defenders were entitled to assume her solicitors would advise her appropriately. The pleadings also failed to set out specific actionable misrepresentations. Accordingly, the pursuer's case was irrelevant and her first plea-in-law was repelled.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 78
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Irene Hill Wright; Defender: Cotias Investments Inc
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil Reduction and Interdict / Debate on Relevancy (pleadings) Before Outer House, Court of Session
Outcome
Pursuer's first plea-in-law repelled; action dismissed as irrelevant at this stage.
Legal Topics
Guarantee and Standard Security, Good Faith in Lending, Misrepresentation, Facility and Circumvention, Independent Legal Advice, Reduction of Deeds
Contract Law Property Law Banking and Finance Law Guarantee and Standard Security Good Faith in Lending Misrepresentation Facility and Circumvention Independent Legal Advice +1 more

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

Parties

Mrs Irene Hill Wright

Pursuer

Cotias Investments Inc

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Reduction and Interdict / Debate on Relevancy (pleadings) Before Outer House, Court of Session

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the guarantee and standard security granted by the pursuer should be reduced on grounds of lack of good faith by the lender, facility and circumvention, or misrepresentation.
  2. 2 Whether the lender owed a duty to ensure the pursuer received independent legal advice under the principle in Smith v Bank of Scotland.
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer's pleadings disclosed a relevant case of facility and circumvention or fraudulent misrepresentation.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's pleadings did not disclose relevant averments of facility and circumvention, nor of a personal relationship with the principal debtor sufficient to invoke the Smith v Bank of Scotland principle. The pursuer had legal representation, and the defenders were entitled to assume her solicitors would advise her appropriately. The pleadings also failed to set out specific actionable misrepresentations. Accordingly, the pursuer's case was irrelevant and her first plea-in-law was repelled.

Court Disposition

Pursuer's first plea-in-law repelled; action dismissed as irrelevant at this stage.

Orders

  • Pursuer's first plea-in-law repelled.
  • No proof before answer allowed on the pleadings as stated.