Glare v Clydesdale Bank PLC [2015] ScotCS CSOH_184 (31 December 2015)

Glare v Clydesdale Bank PLC [2015] ScotCS CSOH_184 (31 December 2015)

The pursuer failed to prove that, but for the defender's mis-selling of the fixed rate loan, he would have sought and obtained a variable rate loan, or that his business would have survived and he would have avoided bankruptcy. Even if causation had been established, the pursuer's debts to the defender exceeded any damages that might have been awarded. Accordingly, the pursuer is not entitled to any payment from the defender.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_184
Parties
Pursuer: John Glare; Defender: Clydesdale Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action for Damages / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Mis Selling of Financial Products, Causation of Loss, Damages Assessment, Set Off of Debts, Bankruptcy
Contract Law Banking Law Tort/delict Mis Selling of Financial Products Causation of Loss Damages Assessment Set Off of Debts Bankruptcy

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Glare

Pursuer

Clydesdale Bank PLC

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action for Damages / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defender's mis-selling of a fixed rate loan caused the pursuer's business failure and bankruptcy
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer would have sought and obtained a variable rate loan but for the mis-selling
  3. 3 Whether the business would have survived with a variable rate loan

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to prove that, but for the defender's mis-selling of the fixed rate loan, he would have sought and obtained a variable rate loan, or that his business would have survived and he would have avoided bankruptcy. Even if causation had been established, the pursuer's debts to the defender exceeded any damages that might have been awarded. Accordingly, the pursuer is not entitled to any payment from the defender.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • The pursuer's claim for damages is refused.
  • No payment is due by the defender to the pursuer.