Heather Capital Ltd v Burness Paull & Williamsons Llp [2015] ScotCS CSOH_150 (06 November 2015)

Heather Capital Ltd v Burness Paull & Williamsons Llp [2015] ScotCS CSOH_150 (06 November 2015)

The pursuer failed to aver circumstances in which it could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered the loss or error within five years of the relevant events. Neither section 11(3) nor section 6(4) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 applies to postpone or prevent prescription. The claim is therefore extinguished by prescription and must be dismissed.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_150
Parties
Pursuer: Heather Capital Limited (in liquidation) and Paul Duffy (as liquidator thereof); Defenders: Burness Paull & Williamsons LLP
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Debate on Relevancy and Prescription
Outcome
Action dismissed as irrelevant; decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders.
Legal Topics
Prescription, Fiduciary Duty, Breach of Trust, Fraud, Limitation of Actions
Commercial Law Professional Negligence Trust Law Prescription Fiduciary Duty Breach of Trust Fraud Limitation of Actions

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

Parties

Heather Capital Limited (in liquidation) and Paul Duffy (as liquidator thereof)

Pursuer

Burness Paull & Williamsons LLP

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil / Debate on Relevancy and Prescription

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pursuer sustained any loss due to defenders' actions
  2. 2 Whether pursuer's claim is extinguished by prescription under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
  3. 3 Applicability of section 11(3) and section 6(4) of the 1973 Act

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to aver circumstances in which it could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered the loss or error within five years of the relevant events. Neither section 11(3) nor section 6(4) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 applies to postpone or prevent prescription. The claim is therefore extinguished by prescription and must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed as irrelevant; decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders.

Orders

  • Sustain defenders’ third plea in law
  • Grant decree of absolvitor