Royal Insurance (UK) Ltd v. AMEC Construction Scotland Ltd & Ors [2002] ScotCS 296 (21 November 2002)

Royal Insurance (UK) Ltd v. AMEC Construction Scotland Ltd & Ors [2002] ScotCS 296 (21 November 2002)

The pursuers have demonstrated necessity for the specification of documents to clarify and make more specific their case and to respond to the defenders' averments, especially given the defenders' lack of frankness and denial of facts within their knowledge. The motion for specification is granted.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 296
Parties
Pursuer: Royal Insurance (UK) Limited; First Defender: AMEC Construction Scotland Limited; Second Defender: Second Defenders
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Motion for Commission and Diligence at Open Record Stage
Outcome
Motion for specification of documents granted
Legal Topics
Recovery of Documents, Specification of Documents, Necessity Test for Diligence, Defects in Construction, Lease Obligations
Civil Procedure Construction Law Insurance Law Recovery of Documents Specification of Documents Necessity Test for Diligence Defects in Construction Lease Obligations

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Royal Insurance (UK) Limited

Pursuer

AMEC Construction Scotland Limited

First Defender

Second Defenders

Second Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Motion for Commission and Diligence at Open Record Stage

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pursuers have shown necessity for specification of documents at open record stage
  2. 2 Whether specification is required to make pleadings more pointed or specific
  3. 3 Whether defenders' lack of frankness justifies granting specification

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers have demonstrated necessity for the specification of documents to clarify and make more specific their case and to respond to the defenders' averments, especially given the defenders' lack of frankness and denial of facts within their knowledge. The motion for specification is granted.

Court Disposition

Motion for specification of documents granted

Orders

  • Specification of documents granted as amended at the Bar to allow for excerpting