Fraser v. Professinal Golders Association [2004] ScotCS 63 (12 March 2004)

Fraser v. Professinal Golders Association [2004] ScotCS 63 (12 March 2004)

Only the implied term requiring fair and reasonable assessment by competent standards was incorporated into the contract, but the pleadings lacked specification of how this was breached. No implied term restricted examination content to the training manual. No duty of care in negligence was imposed for pure economic loss in these circumstances. The action was dismissed as irrelevant in both contract and negligence.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 63
Parties
Pursuer: Colin Fraser; Defender: The Professional Golfers' Association Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil (damages for Breach of Contract and Negligence) / Procedure Roll (motion to Dismiss for Irrelevancy and Lack of Specification)
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Implied Contractual Terms, Negligence and Duty of Care, Professional Examinations, Economic Loss, Judicial Review of Professional Bodies
Contract Law Tort/delict Professional Regulation Implied Contractual Terms Negligence and Duty of Care Professional Examinations Economic Loss Judicial Review of Professional Bodies

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Fraser

Pursuer

The Professional Golfers' Association Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (damages for Breach of Contract and Negligence) / Procedure Roll (motion to Dismiss for Irrelevancy and Lack of Specification)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether implied contractual terms required fair and reasonable assessment and restriction to syllabus in professional examination
  2. 2 Whether a duty of care existed in negligence for economic loss arising from examination failure
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings disclosed a relevant case in contract or negligence

Ratio Decidendi

Only the implied term requiring fair and reasonable assessment by competent standards was incorporated into the contract, but the pleadings lacked specification of how this was breached. No implied term restricted examination content to the training manual. No duty of care in negligence was imposed for pure economic loss in these circumstances. The action was dismissed as irrelevant in both contract and negligence.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Sustained first plea in law for defenders
  • Dismissed the action