Henderson (t/a Henderson Group Development) v Wotherspoon & Ors [2013] ScotCS CSOH_113 (09 July 2013)

Henderson (t/a Henderson Group Development) v Wotherspoon & Ors [2013] ScotCS CSOH_113 (09 July 2013)

It cannot be determined at this stage, without enquiry, that the third type of loss claimed by the pursuer is irrelevant or too remote. The context and knowledge of the defenders regarding the pursuer's business and intentions require factual investigation. Specification in the pleadings is sufficient to allow proof before answer.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSOH_113
Parties
Pursuer: Ronald Henderson t/a Henderson Group Development; Defender: James Robert Edwards Wotherspoon; Defender: Jonathan Lawrence Edwards Wotherspoon; Defender: Barbara Ann Cheetham
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Damages / Procedure Roll Discussion; Interlocutory Decision on Relevancy and Specification
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed; all pleas standing; expenses reserved.
Legal Topics
Remoteness of Damage, Recoverability of Damages, Solicitor's Duty of Care, Specification of Pleadings
Contract Delict Professional Negligence Remoteness of Damage Recoverability of Damages Solicitor's Duty of Care Specification of Pleadings

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Henderson t/a Henderson Group Development

Pursuer

James Robert Edwards Wotherspoon

Defender

Jonathan Lawrence Edwards Wotherspoon

Defender

Barbara Ann Cheetham

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Damages / Procedure Roll Discussion; Interlocutory Decision on Relevancy and Specification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Are the pursuer's averments of loss relating to reinvestment of sale proceeds too remote to be recoverable?
  2. 2 Do the pursuer's pleadings lack sufficient specification regarding the alleged losses?

Ratio Decidendi

It cannot be determined at this stage, without enquiry, that the third type of loss claimed by the pursuer is irrelevant or too remote. The context and knowledge of the defenders regarding the pursuer's business and intentions require factual investigation. Specification in the pleadings is sufficient to allow proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed; all pleas standing; expenses reserved.

Orders

  • Proof before answer on all averments and pleas.
  • No deletion of averments of loss or specification.