Forrest v Hendry [1999] ScotCS 278 (23 November 1999)

Forrest v Hendry [1999] ScotCS 278 (23 November 1999)

The claim for goodwill in respect of clients taken by Mr Hendry was not put in issue or determined in the previous action; the plea of res judicata fails because the substantive issue now raised was not litigated or decided previously, as confirmed by the pleadings and contemporaneous correspondence.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 278
Parties
Pursuer: Robert K Forrest; Defender: James M Hendry
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory (preliminary Hearing on Plea of Res Judicata)
Outcome
Defender's plea of res judicata repelled; pursuer's plea to relevancy sustained to the extent of excluding defender's averments in support of res judicata.
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Dissolution of Partnership, Goodwill Valuation, Accounting Between Partners
Civil Procedure Partnership Law Res Judicata Dissolution of Partnership Goodwill Valuation Accounting Between Partners

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 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert K Forrest

Pursuer

James M Hendry

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory (preliminary Hearing on Plea of Res Judicata)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plea of res judicata applies to bar the pursuer's claim for goodwill in respect of clients taken by the defender after partnership dissolution.

Ratio Decidendi

The claim for goodwill in respect of clients taken by Mr Hendry was not put in issue or determined in the previous action; the plea of res judicata fails because the substantive issue now raised was not litigated or decided previously, as confirmed by the pleadings and contemporaneous correspondence.

Court Disposition

Defender's plea of res judicata repelled; pursuer's plea to relevancy sustained to the extent of excluding defender's averments in support of res judicata.

Orders

  • Exclusion from probation of defender's averments in answer 3 supporting res judicata.
  • Repelling of defender's fifth plea-in-law (res judicata).