Elder v Cameron [2000] ScotCS 37 (10 February 2000)
It was improper to exclude averments from probation and dispose of the counterclaim before the pleadings were amended and finalised; the interlocutor must be recalled except for the part allowing amendment and answers.
- Citation
- [2000] ScotCS 37
- Parties
- Pursuer and Respondent: William Brown Elder; Defender and Appellant: Alan Cameron
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 10 February 2000
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From Sheriff Court Decision on Pleadings and Counterclaim
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed in part; interlocutor recalled except for part allowing amendment and answers.
- Legal Topics
- Pleadings, Amendment of Pleadings, Counterclaim, Relevancy of Averments
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
William Brown Elder
Pursuer and Respondent
Alan Cameron
Defender and Appellant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Interlocutory Appeal From Sheriff Court Decision on Pleadings and Counterclaim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sheriff erred in excluding parts of the defender's averments from probation before amendment of the pursuer's pleadings
- 2 Whether the sheriff erred in granting absolvitor rather than dismissal of the counterclaim at this stage
Ratio Decidendi
It was improper to exclude averments from probation and dispose of the counterclaim before the pleadings were amended and finalised; the interlocutor must be recalled except for the part allowing amendment and answers.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed in part; interlocutor recalled except for part allowing amendment and answers.
Orders
- Recall of the sheriff's interlocutor of 21 November except for the part allowing the pursuer to lodge a minute of amendment and the defender to lodge answers.
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