THE FIRM OF C&L MAIR AGAINST MIKE DEWIS FARM SYSTEMS LTD [2022] ScotCS CSOH_47 (01 July 2022)

THE FIRM OF C&L MAIR AGAINST MIKE DEWIS FARM SYSTEMS LTD [2022] ScotCS CSOH_47 (01 July 2022)

The prescriptive period did not begin until the embankment slip occurred in 2016, as prior to that the pursuer's loss was purely contingent and not actual. The pursuer could not have sued before the slip, as there was only a risk of loss, not actual loss. Therefore, the claim has not prescribed.

Citation
[2022] ScotCS CSOH_47
Parties
Pursuer: THE FIRM OF C&L MAIR; Defender: MIKE DEWIS FARM SYSTEMS LIMITED
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory (debate on Prescription Plea)
Outcome
Defender's prescription plea repelled; action to proceed to proof before answer.
Legal Topics
Prescription, Limitation of Actions, Breach of Contract, Damages
Contract Law Delict Civil Procedure Prescription Limitation of Actions Breach of Contract Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

THE FIRM OF C&L MAIR

Pursuer

MIKE DEWIS FARM SYSTEMS LIMITED

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory (debate on Prescription Plea)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does the prescriptive period begin to run for a claim arising from alleged breach of contract and/or duty in the context of contingent loss?
  2. 2 Does loss occur at the time of installation/payment or only when the contingent event (embankment slip) materialises?

Ratio Decidendi

The prescriptive period did not begin until the embankment slip occurred in 2016, as prior to that the pursuer's loss was purely contingent and not actual. The pursuer could not have sued before the slip, as there was only a risk of loss, not actual loss. Therefore, the claim has not prescribed.

Court Disposition

Defender's prescription plea repelled; action to proceed to proof before answer.

Orders

  • Defender's fourth plea-in-law repelled.
  • Action to proceed to proof before answer on remaining averments and pleas.