Gordon Dunn against Menzies Distribution LTD (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCEDIN 22 (27 November 2025)

Gordon Dunn against Menzies Distribution LTD (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCEDIN 22 (27 November 2025)

The pursuer abandoned the action and admitted to making fraudulent representations about his mental health, work capacity, and personal circumstances, which were material to the claim. Surveillance evidence and admissions confirmed the falsehoods. The court found this conduct amounted to fraudulent representation and abuse of process, justifying disapplication of QOCS, award of expenses on a solicitor-client, client-paying basis, recall of the anonymity order, and certification of the defender's expert.

Citation
[2026] SCEDIN 22
Parties
Pursuer: Gordon Dunn; Defender: Menzies Distribution Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Judgment on Defender's Motion Following Abandonment by Pursuer
Outcome
Defender's motion granted in full; action abandoned by pursuer; QOCS disapplied; expenses awarded to defender on solicitor-client, client-paying basis; anonymity order recalled; defender assoilzied from craves of the action.
Legal Topics
Qualified One Way Cost Shifting (qocs), Fraudulent Representation, Abuse of Process, Anonymity Orders, Expenses (costs), Certification of Skilled Witness, Sanction for Counsel
Civil Procedure Data Protection Personal Injury Qualified One Way Cost Shifting (qocs) Fraudulent Representation Abuse of Process Anonymity Orders Expenses (costs) +2 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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gordon Dunn

Pursuer

Menzies Distribution Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Judgment on Defender's Motion Following Abandonment by Pursuer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether QOCS protection should be disapplied due to abandonment and fraudulent representations
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's conduct amounted to abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the defender is entitled to expenses on a solicitor-client, client-paying basis

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer abandoned the action and admitted to making fraudulent representations about his mental health, work capacity, and personal circumstances, which were material to the claim. Surveillance evidence and admissions confirmed the falsehoods. The court found this conduct amounted to fraudulent representation and abuse of process, justifying disapplication of QOCS, award of expenses on a solicitor-client, client-paying basis, recall of the anonymity order, and certification of the defender's expert.

Court Disposition

Defender's motion granted in full; action abandoned by pursuer; QOCS disapplied; expenses awarded to defender on solicitor-client, client-paying basis; anonymity order recalled; defender assoilzied from craves of the action.

Orders

  • QOCS disapplied under OCR 31A.2(2)(d) and sections 8(a) and 8(c) of the 2018 Act
  • Pursuer liable to defender in expenses on solicitor-client, client-paying scale