Potts & Ors v McNulty [2000] ScotCS 102 (11 April 2000)

Potts & Ors v McNulty [2000] ScotCS 102 (11 April 2000)

Special cause was shown, albeit on a limited basis, due to lack of specification regarding the second pursuer's pension claim and the complexity of applying different multipliers for various heads of claim, making the case unsuitable for jury trial. Proof before answer was allowed.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 102
Parties
Pursuers: Caroline Ann Potts and Others; Defender: John McNulty
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages Action / Debate on Mode of Enquiry (jury Trial Vs Proof Before Answer)
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed; jury trial refused.
Legal Topics
Jury Trial Suitability, Specification of Pleadings, Assessment of Damages, Proof Before Answer, Complexity of Claims
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Jury Trial Suitability Specification of Pleadings Assessment of Damages Proof Before Answer Complexity of Claims

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Caroline Ann Potts and Others

Pursuers

John McNulty

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages Action / Debate on Mode of Enquiry (jury Trial Vs Proof Before Answer)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the complexity and specification of the pursuers' claims constitute special cause to withhold the case from jury trial and allow proof before answer instead

Ratio Decidendi

Special cause was shown, albeit on a limited basis, due to lack of specification regarding the second pursuer's pension claim and the complexity of applying different multipliers for various heads of claim, making the case unsuitable for jury trial. Proof before answer was allowed.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed; jury trial refused.

Orders

  • Allow proof before answer.