Davies v Strauss (UK) Ltd [2001] ScotCS 32 (13 February 2001)

Davies v Strauss (UK) Ltd [2001] ScotCS 32 (13 February 2001)

It cannot be determined without inquiry whether the pursuer's entitlement to long term disability benefit survived termination of employment or was waived by election of ill-health severance; the defenders' averments are not irrelevant and should be remitted to probation for proof before answer.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 32
Parties
Pursuer: Joyce Davies; Defenders: Levi Strauss (UK) Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Civil / Procedure Roll Hearing on Relevancy and Probation of Averments
Outcome
Pursuer's fourth and fifth pleas-in-law repelled; defenders' averments remitted to probation; proof before answer allowed.
Legal Topics
Long Term Disability Benefits, Employee Pension Schemes, Waiver of Entitlement, Relevancy of Pleadings
Employment Law Insurance Law Contract Law Long Term Disability Benefits Employee Pension Schemes Waiver of Entitlement Relevancy of Pleadings

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joyce Davies

Pursuer

Levi Strauss (UK) Limited

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil / Procedure Roll Hearing on Relevancy and Probation of Averments

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's entitlement to long term disability benefit survived termination of employment
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer waived entitlement to benefit by electing ill-health severance
  3. 3 Whether defenders' averments regarding cessation of cover and ill-health severance are irrelevant and should be excluded from probation

Ratio Decidendi

It cannot be determined without inquiry whether the pursuer's entitlement to long term disability benefit survived termination of employment or was waived by election of ill-health severance; the defenders' averments are not irrelevant and should be remitted to probation for proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Pursuer's fourth and fifth pleas-in-law repelled; defenders' averments remitted to probation; proof before answer allowed.

Orders

  • Repel pursuer's fourth and fifth pleas-in-law
  • Allow defenders' averments to probation