JOHN GLARE AGAINST CLYDESDALE BANK PLC [2023] ScotCS CSOH_67 (06 October 2023)

JOHN GLARE AGAINST CLYDESDALE BANK PLC [2023] ScotCS CSOH_67 (06 October 2023)

The pursuer's case was irrelevant because he did not offer to prove that the alleged perjured evidence had any bearing on the outcome of the prior action. The calculation of break costs was not material to the issues decided in the 2013 action, and the pursuer could have discovered the information earlier with reasonable diligence. There were no exceptional circumstances justifying reduction of the decree, and the principle of finality in litigation precluded further proceedings.

Citation
[2023] ScotCS CSOH_67
Parties
Pursuer: John Glare; Defender: Clydesdale Bank PLC
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
06 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Commercial Action (reduction of Decree) / Debate on Relevancy (plea in Law)
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Reduction of Decree, Finality of Litigation, Fraud on the Court, Subornation of Perjury, Res Judicata, Res Noviter
Civil Procedure Commercial Law Reduction of Decree Finality of Litigation Fraud on the Court Subornation of Perjury Res Judicata Res Noviter

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Glare

Pursuer

Clydesdale Bank PLC

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Action (reduction of Decree) / Debate on Relevancy (plea in Law)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a decree in foro can be reduced on the basis of alleged subornation of perjury by a witness in the prior action
  2. 2 Whether the alleged perjured evidence was causative of the prior judgment
  3. 3 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify reduction of the prior decree

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's case was irrelevant because he did not offer to prove that the alleged perjured evidence had any bearing on the outcome of the prior action. The calculation of break costs was not material to the issues decided in the 2013 action, and the pursuer could have discovered the information earlier with reasonable diligence. There were no exceptional circumstances justifying reduction of the decree, and the principle of finality in litigation precluded further proceedings.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Sustained the bank's first plea-in-law and dismissed the action
  • Reserved all questions of expenses