DR PRIM BALBIR SINGH v. BRIAN NAPIER [2011] ScotSC 127 (29 July 2011)

The pursuer's pleadings failed to specify any relevant act of discrimination or the basis for the monetary claim, and the remedies sought were not competent under the Race Relations Act 1976. The sheriff was correct to dismiss the action without allowing proof.

Citation: [2011] ScotSC 127
Parties: Pursuer & Appellant: Dr Prim Balbir Singh; Defender & Respondent: Brian Napier QC
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 29 July 2011
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Sheriff's Interlocutor Dismissing Action After Debate on Preliminary Pleas
Outcome: Appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor adhered to.
Legal Topics: Race Discrimination, Pleadings, Remedies, Unjust Enrichment, Expenses

Civil Procedure Discrimination Law Race Discrimination Pleadings Remedies Unjust Enrichment Expenses

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2

Parties

Dr Prim Balbir Singh

Pursuer & Appellant

Brian Napier QC

Defender & Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Sheriff's Interlocutor Dismissing Action After Debate on Preliminary Pleas

Legal Issues

1 Whether the pursuer's pleadings disclosed a relevant case of racial discrimination under the Race Relations Act 1976
2 Whether the court could grant the remedy of public examination of the defender
3 Whether the pursuer was entitled to repetition of money allegedly paid on a pro bono basis

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal refused; sheriff's interlocutor adhered to.

Orders

Pursuer and appellant found liable to defender and respondent in expenses of the appeal.
Account of expenses remitted to Auditor of Court to tax and report.