CENTENARY 6 LTD AGAINST TLT LLP [2023] ScotCS CSOH_28 (05 May 2023)

CENTENARY 6 LTD AGAINST TLT LLP [2023] ScotCS CSOH_28 (05 May 2023)

The court held that the underlying section 212 Note was prescribed before it was raised, as the obligation to make reparation by the joint liquidators to the company was extinguished by the passage of more than five years without a relevant claim. The knowledge relevant for prescription was that of the company, not the shareholder bringing the section 212 Note. As a result, the pursuer lost no real or substantial chance as a result of the defender's negligence, and the claim for damages failed.

Citation
[2023] ScotCS CSOH_28
Parties
Pursuer: Centenary 6 Limited; Defender: TLT LLP
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
05 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence / Breach of Contract Claim / Judgment After Proof (trial) on Quantum and Causation; Liability Admitted
Outcome
Action dismissed; decree of absolvitor for the defender.
Legal Topics
Loss of a Chance, Solicitor's Negligence, Liquidator's Duties, Prescription and Limitation, Section 212 Insolvency Act 1986, Damages Assessment
Professional Negligence Contract Law Insolvency Law Prescription (limitation) Loss of a Chance Solicitor's Negligence Liquidator's Duties Prescription and Limitation +2 more

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Centenary 6 Limited

Pursuer

TLT LLP

Defender

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence / Breach of Contract Claim / Judgment After Proof (trial) on Quantum and Causation; Liability Admitted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer suffered loss as a result of the admitted negligence of its solicitors in failing to lodge caution in time in the section 212 Note; specifically, whether the underlying claim (section 212 Note) was time-barred (prescribed) and thus whether any chance of success was lost.
  2. 2 How to assess damages in a loss of a chance claim where the underlying claim is complex and involves multiple contingencies.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the underlying section 212 Note was prescribed before it was raised, as the obligation to make reparation by the joint liquidators to the company was extinguished by the passage of more than five years without a relevant claim. The knowledge relevant for prescription was that of the company, not the shareholder bringing the section 212 Note. As a result, the pursuer lost no real or substantial chance as a result of the defender's negligence, and the claim for damages failed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; decree of absolvitor for the defender.

Orders

  • Decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the defender.
  • Pursuer's claim for damages refused.