Park Lane Developments (Glasgow Harbour) Ltd v. Jesner [1998] ScotSC 33 (03 May 2006)

Park Lane Developments (Glasgow Harbour) Ltd v. Jesner [1998] ScotSC 33 (03 May 2006)

The missives required the conveyance of ownership of an exclusive car parking space, not merely an exclusive right to use; the disposition offered did not meet this requirement. The pursuers' arguments on personal bar, waiver, and acquiescence were irrelevant and unspecific. The defender was entitled to resile, and the action was dismissed.

Citation
[1998] ScotSC 33
Parties
Pursuer: Park Lane Developments (Glasgow Harbour) Limited; Defender: Jeffrey Jesner
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 May 2006
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Judgment After Debate on Relevancy and Construction of Contract
Outcome
Action dismissed with expenses in favour of the defender.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Missives, Conveyancing, Personal Bar, Waiver, Acquiescence
Contract Law Property Law Interpretation of Missives Conveyancing Personal Bar Waiver Acquiescence

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Park Lane Developments (Glasgow Harbour) Limited

Pursuer

Jeffrey Jesner

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Judgment After Debate on Relevancy and Construction of Contract

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the missives required the conveyance of ownership of an exclusive car parking space or only an exclusive right to use
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers were entitled to decree for implement based on the disposition offered
  3. 3 Whether the defender was personally barred, had waived, or acquiesced to the title offered

Ratio Decidendi

The missives required the conveyance of ownership of an exclusive car parking space, not merely an exclusive right to use; the disposition offered did not meet this requirement. The pursuers' arguments on personal bar, waiver, and acquiescence were irrelevant and unspecific. The defender was entitled to resile, and the action was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed with expenses in favour of the defender.

Orders

  • Action dismissed
  • Pursuers found liable to the defender in expenses