Massie v McCaig & Ors [2013] ScotCS CSIH_37 (21 March 2013)
The interlocutor recalling the interim interdict is interlocutory in both form and substance; leave to appeal is required and is refused as the case does not raise an issue of law of general or public importance and the merits have not been finally determined.
- Citation
- [2013] ScotCS CSIH_37
- Parties
- Pursuer and Respondent: Alan Massie; Defenders and Reclaimers: Callum McCaig & Others
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 21 March 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Application for Leave to Appeal / Post Interlocutory Judgment, Application for Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- Leave to Appeal, Interim Interdict, Fair Comment Defence, Qualified Privilege, Human Rights Act Section 12(3)
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alan Massie
Pursuer and Respondent
Callum McCaig & Others
Defenders and Reclaimers
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal / Post Interlocutory Judgment, Application for Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether leave to appeal to the UK Supreme Court is required from an interlocutory judgment recalling an interim interdict
- 2 Whether the interlocutor is final in substance or interlocutory
- 3 Whether the case raises an issue of law of general or public importance justifying leave
Ratio Decidendi
The interlocutor recalling the interim interdict is interlocutory in both form and substance; leave to appeal is required and is refused as the case does not raise an issue of law of general or public importance and the merits have not been finally determined.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal refused
Orders
- Leave to appeal to the United Kingdom Supreme Court is refused.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment