Global Resources Group Ltd v Mackay [2008] ScotCS CSOH_148 (21 October 2008)

Global Resources Group Ltd v Mackay [2008] ScotCS CSOH_148 (21 October 2008)

The pursuers' pleadings do not adequately specify the relationship between the defender and GDP or the contractual and company law context necessary to establish whether the defender, as controller of GDP, can be liable for inducing breach of contract. The law requires intention and inducement, not mere foreseeability or passive causation. The case is not in a state for proof before answer and requires further specification and procedure.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_148
Parties
Pursuer: Global Resources Group Limited; Defender: Alex Mackay
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil (delict Inducing Breach of Contract) / Debate on Relevancy (motion to Dismiss)
Outcome
Case put out By Order for further procedure; no dismissal at this stage.
Legal Topics
Inducing Breach of Contract, Corporate Personality, Director Liability, Unlawful Means, Economic Torts
Delict Contract Law Company Law Inducing Breach of Contract Corporate Personality Director Liability Unlawful Means Economic Torts

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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Global Resources Group Limited

Pursuer

Alex Mackay

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (delict Inducing Breach of Contract) / Debate on Relevancy (motion to Dismiss)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What are the essential elements of the delict of inducing breach of contract under Scots law?
  2. 2 Does a director/controller of a company commit the delict by causing the company to breach its contract with a third party?
  3. 3 Is mere foreseeability of breach sufficient for liability, or is intention required?

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers' pleadings do not adequately specify the relationship between the defender and GDP or the contractual and company law context necessary to establish whether the defender, as controller of GDP, can be liable for inducing breach of contract. The law requires intention and inducement, not mere foreseeability or passive causation. The case is not in a state for proof before answer and requires further specification and procedure.

Court Disposition

Case put out By Order for further procedure; no dismissal at this stage.

Orders

  • Case to be put out By Order to allow parties to discuss further procedure.