THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS AGAINST SCOTLAND GAS NETWORKS PLC [2023] ScotCS CSOH_77 (07 November 2023)

THE SCOTTISH MINISTERS AGAINST SCOTLAND GAS NETWORKS PLC [2023] ScotCS CSOH_77 (07 November 2023)

The pursuers have a viable argument that the defender's letter and subsequent payment created a new contract obliging the defender to act reasonably in identifying and repaying sums not reasonably incurred. The prescription plea and unjustified enrichment claim cannot be determined on pleadings alone and require proof before answer.

Citation
[2023] ScotCS CSOH_77
Parties
Pursuer: The Scottish Ministers; Defender: Scotland Gas Networks PLC
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
07 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Debate on Relevancy and Specification; Interlocutory Decision
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed; defender's plea sustained only in part
Legal Topics
Prescription of Obligations, Unjustified Enrichment, Contract Formation, Breach of Contract, Compensation Events
Contract Law Restitution Prescription Prescription of Obligations Unjustified Enrichment Contract Formation Breach of Contract Compensation Events

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Scottish Ministers

Pursuer

Scotland Gas Networks PLC

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Debate on Relevancy and Specification; Interlocutory Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a new contract was formed by the defender's letter of 10 March 2016 and subsequent payment
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers' claim for repayment is prescribed under the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
  3. 3 Whether the pursuers have a relevant claim in unjustified enrichment

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers have a viable argument that the defender's letter and subsequent payment created a new contract obliging the defender to act reasonably in identifying and repaying sums not reasonably incurred. The prescription plea and unjustified enrichment claim cannot be determined on pleadings alone and require proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed; defender's plea sustained only in part

Orders

  • Averments relating to Mackay v Dick & Stevenson principle excluded from probation
  • Action remitted for proof before answer