STEPHEN ANTHONY QUINN AND OTHERS AGAINST WRIGHT’S INSULATIONS LTD [2020] ScotCS CSOH_21 (27 February 2020)

STEPHEN ANTHONY QUINN AND OTHERS AGAINST WRIGHT’S INSULATIONS LTD [2020] ScotCS CSOH_21 (27 February 2020)

The pursuers failed to establish any explanation for the deceased's failure to pursue a claim timeously following the diagnosis in 1993/94. There is no evidence of subjective ignorance of the right to damages at that time. The mere fact that the claim is for mesothelioma does not, of itself, justify the exercise of discretion under section 19A. The defenders are prejudiced by the reimposition of liability and loss of opportunity to settle at a lower level. The circumstances are not sufficiently cogent to merit depriving the defender of a complete defence.

Citation
[2020] ScotCS CSOH_21
Parties
Pursuers: Stephen Anthony Quinn and Others; Defender: Wright’s Insulations Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action (asbestos Related Disease, Mesothelioma) / Preliminary Proof Under Section 19 a of the Prescription and Limitation (scotland) Act 1973
Outcome
Action dismissed; discretion under section 19A not exercised.
Legal Topics
Mesothelioma, Asbestos Exposure, Prescription and Limitation, Section 19 a Discretion, Time Bar, Damages for Fatal Disease
Personal Injury Limitation of Actions Industrial Disease Mesothelioma Asbestos Exposure Prescription and Limitation Section 19 a Discretion Time Bar +1 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 6 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Anthony Quinn and Others

Pursuers

Wright’s Insulations Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action (asbestos Related Disease, Mesothelioma) / Preliminary Proof Under Section 19 a of the Prescription and Limitation (scotland) Act 1973

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under section 19A of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 to allow a time-barred claim for mesothelioma to proceed
  2. 2 Whether subjective ignorance of the right to damages explains the failure to pursue a claim timeously
  3. 3 Whether the fact that the claim is for mesothelioma is a relevant factor in exercising discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers failed to establish any explanation for the deceased's failure to pursue a claim timeously following the diagnosis in 1993/94. There is no evidence of subjective ignorance of the right to damages at that time. The mere fact that the claim is for mesothelioma does not, of itself, justify the exercise of discretion under section 19A. The defenders are prejudiced by the reimposition of liability and loss of opportunity to settle at a lower level. The circumstances are not sufficiently cogent to merit depriving the defender of a complete defence.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; discretion under section 19A not exercised.

Orders

  • The pursuers' claims are time-barred and not allowed to proceed under section 19A.
  • No further orders.