Appeal by Martin McGowan against Springfield Properties Plc (Court of Session) [2024] CSIH 31 (20 August 2024)

Appeal by Martin McGowan against Springfield Properties Plc (Court of Session) [2024] CSIH 31 (20 August 2024)

The five year negative prescription period for damages based on wrongful interim interdict begins on recall or final determination, not on the date of grant. Where decree of absolvitor is granted in the interdict action, this is conclusive proof of wrongfulness unless a change of circumstances explains otherwise; no further onus lies on the claimant to prove the interdict was wrongful.

Citation
[2024] CSIH 31
Parties
Pursuer and Respondent: Martin McGowan; Defender and Reclaimer: Springfield Properties Plc
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 August 2024
Procedural Posture
Appeal (reclaiming Motion) / Inner House, Court of Session – Decision on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; cross-appeal upheld; case remitted for proof on causation and quantum.
Legal Topics
Prescription (limitation of Actions), Wrongful Interdict, Damages, Recall of Interim Orders
Civil Procedure Tort/delict Remedies Prescription (limitation of Actions) Wrongful Interdict Damages Recall of Interim Orders

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin McGowan

Pursuer and Respondent

Springfield Properties Plc

Defender and Reclaimer

Procedural Posture

Appeal (reclaiming Motion) / Inner House, Court of Session – Decision on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does the five year negative prescriptive period for damages based on wrongful interim interdict commence?
  2. 2 Is recall of an interim interdict conclusive evidence of its wrongful nature absent a judicial determination on the merits?

Ratio Decidendi

The five year negative prescription period for damages based on wrongful interim interdict begins on recall or final determination, not on the date of grant. Where decree of absolvitor is granted in the interdict action, this is conclusive proof of wrongfulness unless a change of circumstances explains otherwise; no further onus lies on the claimant to prove the interdict was wrongful.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; cross-appeal upheld; case remitted for proof on causation and quantum.

Orders

  • Refusal of Springfield's reclaiming motion.
  • Upholding of Mr McGowan's cross-appeal.