APPEAL BY WPH DEVELOPMENTS LTD AGAINST YOUNG & GAULT LLP (IN LIQUIDATION) [2021] ScotCS CSIH_39 (29 July 2021)

APPEAL BY WPH DEVELOPMENTS LTD AGAINST YOUNG & GAULT LLP (IN LIQUIDATION) [2021] ScotCS CSIH_39 (29 July 2021)

The prescriptive period under section 11(3) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 begins when the creditor knows the objective facts constituting loss, injury, or damage, not when they subjectively recognise detriment. The pursuers knew of the facts (walls built, houses sold) more than five years before the action commenced; thus, any claim had prescribed.

Citation
[2021] ScotCS CSIH_39
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: WPH Developments Limited; Defenders and Appellants: Young & Gault LLP (in liquidation)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Final Appellate Decision
Outcome
Appeal upheld; claim prescribed
Legal Topics
Prescription, Limitation of Actions, Negligent Architectural Services, Latent Damage
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Property Law Prescription Limitation of Actions Negligent Architectural Services Latent Damage

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

WPH Developments Limited

Pursuers and Respondents

Young & Gault LLP (in liquidation)

Defenders and Appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Final Appellate Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuers' claim for damages was extinguished by the five year short negative prescription under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
  2. 2 Whether section 11(3) of the 1973 Act postponed the start of the prescriptive period due to lack of awareness of loss

Ratio Decidendi

The prescriptive period under section 11(3) of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 begins when the creditor knows the objective facts constituting loss, injury, or damage, not when they subjectively recognise detriment. The pursuers knew of the facts (walls built, houses sold) more than five years before the action commenced; thus, any claim had prescribed.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; claim prescribed

Orders

  • Sheriff's interlocutor of 8 April 2020 recalled
  • Order sustaining defenders' pleas in law