BUMPERS LIMITED AGAINST BROXBURN MOTORZONE LIMITED [2018] ScotCS CSOH_43 (26 April 2018)

BUMPERS LIMITED AGAINST BROXBURN MOTORZONE LIMITED [2018] ScotCS CSOH_43 (26 April 2018)

The pursuer failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the parties' common intention was to lease only the showroom and forecourt. The objective evidence supported the defender's position that the whole premises were intended to be let. There was consensus in idem, and no bad faith was established. Rectification and reduction were refused.

Citation
[2018] ScotCS CSOH_43
Parties
Pursuer: Bumpers Limited; Defender: Broxburn Motorzone Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
26 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action / Proof Before Answer; Judgment
Outcome
Action dismissed; defender assoilzied from first and second conclusions of the summons.
Legal Topics
Rectification of Contract, Consensus in Idem, Bad Faith, Lease Agreements, Reduction of Contract
Contract Law Property Law Rectification of Contract Consensus in Idem Bad Faith Lease Agreements Reduction of Contract

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bumpers Limited

Pursuer

Broxburn Motorzone Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action / Proof Before Answer; Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Minute of Extension and Variation of Lease accurately reflected the parties' common intention at the time of agreement
  2. 2 Whether rectification or reduction of the Minute should be granted
  3. 3 Whether there was consensus in idem between the parties

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the parties' common intention was to lease only the showroom and forecourt. The objective evidence supported the defender's position that the whole premises were intended to be let. There was consensus in idem, and no bad faith was established. Rectification and reduction were refused.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; defender assoilzied from first and second conclusions of the summons.

Orders

  • Sustain defender's second, third, fourth, and fifth pleas-in-law
  • Repel pursuer's pleas-in-law