Deans v. Thus Plc [2004] ScotCS 53 (03 March 2004)

Deans v. Thus Plc [2004] ScotCS 53 (03 March 2004)

It is not possible to determine prescription without inquiry into the facts regarding the nature of the obligation and the possibilities for enrolment in the pension scheme; proof is required to establish whether the obligation was continuing and when loss became irredeemable.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 53
Parties
Pursuer: John Deans; Defender: Thus Plc
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil (breach of Contract, Damages) / Interlocutory (debate on Prescription Plea, Decision to Allow Proof Before Answer)
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed on the whole pleadings; no decision on prescription at this stage.
Legal Topics
Prescription (limitation of Actions), Breach of Contract, Employer Pension Obligations, Continuing Obligations, Damages
Contract Law Employment Law Pensions Law Civil Procedure Prescription (limitation of Actions) Breach of Contract Employer Pension Obligations Continuing Obligations +1 more

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Deans

Pursuer

Thus Plc

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (breach of Contract, Damages) / Interlocutory (debate on Prescription Plea, Decision to Allow Proof Before Answer)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's claim for damages for failure to enrol in a pension scheme is prescribed under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
  2. 2 Whether the obligation to enrol and make contributions is a continuing obligation or a one-off breach
  3. 3 Whether section 11(2) of the 1973 Act applies to postpone the commencement of prescription

Ratio Decidendi

It is not possible to determine prescription without inquiry into the facts regarding the nature of the obligation and the possibilities for enrolment in the pension scheme; proof is required to establish whether the obligation was continuing and when loss became irredeemable.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed on the whole pleadings; no decision on prescription at this stage.

Orders

  • Allow proof before answer on the whole pleadings.