Abrahm v British International Helicopters Ltd [2013] ScotCS CSOH_69 (02 May 2013)

Abrahm v British International Helicopters Ltd [2013] ScotCS CSOH_69 (02 May 2013)

The court found that there had been inordinate and inexcusable delay attributable to the pursuer and his solicitors, particularly in failing to obtain necessary expert evidence and progress the case over a period of 24 years. This delay resulted in specific unfairness to the defenders, as the quality of evidence regarding the pursuer's condition and the causation of PTSD had been irreparably diminished, creating a substantial risk that a fair trial was no longer possible. Accordingly, the requirements of Rule of Court 21A were satisfied, and the action was dismissed.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSOH_69
Parties
Pursuer: John Abrahm; Defender: British International Helicopters Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Personal Injury / Motion for Dismissal Under Rule of Court 21 a
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay, Dismissal for Want of Prosecution, Warsaw Convention, Bodily Injury Definition, Expert Evidence, Legal Aid Delays
Civil Procedure Aviation Law Inordinate and Inexcusable Delay Dismissal for Want of Prosecution Warsaw Convention Bodily Injury Definition Expert Evidence Legal Aid Delays

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Abrahm

Pursuer

British International Helicopters Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Personal Injury / Motion for Dismissal Under Rule of Court 21 a

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was inordinate and inexcusable delay by the pursuer or his agents in progressing the claim
  2. 2 Whether such delay resulted in unfairness specific to the factual circumstances of the claim
  3. 3 Whether the action should be dismissed under Rule of Court 21A

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there had been inordinate and inexcusable delay attributable to the pursuer and his solicitors, particularly in failing to obtain necessary expert evidence and progress the case over a period of 24 years. This delay resulted in specific unfairness to the defenders, as the quality of evidence regarding the pursuer's condition and the causation of PTSD had been irreparably diminished, creating a substantial risk that a fair trial was no longer possible. Accordingly, the requirements of Rule of Court 21A were satisfied, and the action was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Defenders' motion for dismissal granted under Rule of Court 21A