ALEXANDER BARBOUR & RINGFORD MOTOR SERVICES LIMITED v. VIVIENNE MARRIOTT [2012] ScotSC 52 (24 April 2012)

ALEXANDER BARBOUR & RINGFORD MOTOR SERVICES LIMITED v. VIVIENNE MARRIOTT [2012] ScotSC 52 (24 April 2012)

The Sheriff Principal held that the appellant's pleadings, while not finalised, contained sufficient averments to infer a declaration of trust and thus disclosed a prima facie case. The Sheriff erred by applying a test of absolute relevancy rather than considering whether there was a case to try and the balance of convenience. The balance of convenience favoured continuation of the interim interdict to preserve the status quo pending resolution of the dispute.

Citation
[2012] ScotSC 52
Parties
First Pursuer and Appellant: Alexander Barbour; Second Pursuer and Appellant: Ringford Motor Services Ltd; Defender and Respondent: Vivienne Marriott
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
24 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Recall of Interim Interdict
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Sheriff's interlocutor recalled; interim interdict granted as craved; expenses of appeal awarded to appellant.
Legal Topics
Interim Interdict, Constitution of Trust, Relevancy of Pleadings, Balance of Convenience
Trusts and Equity Property Law Civil Procedure Interim Interdict Constitution of Trust Relevancy of Pleadings Balance of Convenience

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Alexander Barbour

First Pursuer and Appellant

Ringford Motor Services Ltd

Second Pursuer and Appellant

Vivienne Marriott

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Recall of Interim Interdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleadings disclosed a prima facie case for interim interdict based on the existence of a trust
  2. 2 Whether the Sheriff erred in recalling the interim interdict on grounds of irrelevancy of the writ

Ratio Decidendi

The Sheriff Principal held that the appellant's pleadings, while not finalised, contained sufficient averments to infer a declaration of trust and thus disclosed a prima facie case. The Sheriff erred by applying a test of absolute relevancy rather than considering whether there was a case to try and the balance of convenience. The balance of convenience favoured continuation of the interim interdict to preserve the status quo pending resolution of the dispute.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Sheriff's interlocutor recalled; interim interdict granted as craved; expenses of appeal awarded to appellant.

Orders

  • Recall of Sheriff's interlocutor of 15 March 2012
  • Grant of interim interdict prohibiting the defender from marketing or selling the specified properties until further order