Dem-Master Demolition Ltd v Alba Plastics Ltd [2014] ScotCS CSOH_84 (13 May 2014)

Dem-Master Demolition Ltd v Alba Plastics Ltd [2014] ScotCS CSOH_84 (13 May 2014)

There was a prima facie case that the defenders had a right of access under the lease, supported by pleadings, affidavits, and the terms of the lease. The balance of convenience favored the defenders due to the extreme harm from business interruption, outweighing the pursuers' concerns about asset removal. Interim orders were appropriate under the statutory provisions.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSOH_84
Parties
Pursuer: Dem-Master Demolition Ltd; Defender: Alba Plastics Ltd
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial Lease Dispute) / Interim Motion for Amendment and Interim Order Under Court of Session Act 1988 Sections 46 and 47(2)
Outcome
Motion granted; interim order made in favor of defenders; leave to reclaim granted and interlocutor suspended pending reclaiming motion.
Legal Topics
Lease Interpretation, Access Rights, Interim Orders, Counterclaim Procedure
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Civil Procedure Lease Interpretation Access Rights Interim Orders Counterclaim Procedure

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dem-Master Demolition Ltd

Pursuer

Alba Plastics Ltd

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial Lease Dispute) / Interim Motion for Amendment and Interim Order Under Court of Session Act 1988 Sections 46 and 47(2)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders (tenants) have a right of access via certain doors under the lease
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers (landlords) breached obligations by restricting access and cutting electricity
  3. 3 Whether interim orders should be granted under sections 46 and 47(2) of the Court of Session Act 1988

Ratio Decidendi

There was a prima facie case that the defenders had a right of access under the lease, supported by pleadings, affidavits, and the terms of the lease. The balance of convenience favored the defenders due to the extreme harm from business interruption, outweighing the pursuers' concerns about asset removal. Interim orders were appropriate under the statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Motion granted; interim order made in favor of defenders; leave to reclaim granted and interlocutor suspended pending reclaiming motion.

Orders

  • Minute of amendment received and allowed; defences and counterclaim amended accordingly.
  • Interim order granted under sections 46 and 47(2) of the Court of Session Act 1988 for access as sought by defenders.