JAC (AP) v RC [1999] ScotCS 249 (28 October 1999)

JAC (AP) v RC [1999] ScotCS 249 (28 October 1999)

The court held that all claims prior to 1996 were time-barred as there was no sufficient averment of a continuing course of conduct or of inability to act earlier. However, the 1996 incident was not time-barred, and the pursuer's averments were sufficient to allow proof on that matter, with all pleas standing.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 249
Parties
Pursuer: J. A. C. (A. P.); Defender: R. C.
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 October 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil (damages for Sexual Abuse) / Procedure Roll; Interlocutor on Relevancy and Time Bar Pleas
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed with all pleas standing; certain averments excluded from probation.
Legal Topics
Sexual Abuse, Prescription and Limitation, Section 17 and 19 a Prescription and Limitation (scotland) Act 1973, Damages, Equitable Discretion
Tort Personal Injury Limitation of Actions Sexual Abuse Prescription and Limitation Section 17 and 19 a Prescription and Limitation (scotland) Act 1973 Damages Equitable Discretion

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

J. A. C. (A. P.)

Pursuer

R. C.

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (damages for Sexual Abuse) / Procedure Roll; Interlocutor on Relevancy and Time Bar Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's claims are time-barred under section 17 of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
  2. 2 Whether the alleged incidents constitute a continuing act or discrete acts
  3. 3 Whether the court should exercise its discretion under section 19A to allow the action to proceed out of time

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that all claims prior to 1996 were time-barred as there was no sufficient averment of a continuing course of conduct or of inability to act earlier. However, the 1996 incident was not time-barred, and the pursuer's averments were sufficient to allow proof on that matter, with all pleas standing.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed with all pleas standing; certain averments excluded from probation.

Orders

  • Allow proof before answer with all pleas standing.
  • Delete the sentence 'Thereafter the defender continued to behave in an inappropriate manner and to make inappropriate comments towards the pursuer' from the pleadings.