Kyle v. P & J Stormonth Darling [1992] ScotCS CSIH_6 (19 August 1992)

Kyle v. P & J Stormonth Darling [1992] ScotCS CSIH_6 (19 August 1992)

Where a solicitor's negligence causes a client to lose the right to pursue a legal claim, the client need not prove that he would probably have succeeded in the lost litigation; it is sufficient to show that the lost right had some tangible, non-negligible value. The pleadings in this case, averring a reasonable prospect of success, are sufficient to justify proof before answer.

Citation
[1992] ScotCS CSIH_6
Parties
Pursuer/respondent: Kyle; Defenders/reclaimers: P & J Stormonth Darling WS
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 August 1992
Procedural Posture
Professional Negligence Action (delict and Contract) / Reclaiming Motion (appeal) Against Interlocutor Allowing Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; proof before answer allowed.
Legal Topics
Solicitor's Negligence, Loss of Chance, Damages, Specification of Pleadings, Loss of Legal Right
Professional Negligence Contract Law Delict (tort) Solicitor's Negligence Loss of Chance Damages Specification of Pleadings Loss of Legal Right

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kyle

Pursuer/respondent

P & J Stormonth Darling WS

Defenders/reclaimers

Procedural Posture

Professional Negligence Action (delict and Contract) / Reclaiming Motion (appeal) Against Interlocutor Allowing Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether loss of a legal right due to solicitor's negligence constitutes actionable loss without proof of probable success in the lost litigation
  2. 2 Whether averments of a 'reasonable prospect' of success are sufficient to justify proof before answer
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings provided adequate specification of the basis for the alleged loss

Ratio Decidendi

Where a solicitor's negligence causes a client to lose the right to pursue a legal claim, the client need not prove that he would probably have succeeded in the lost litigation; it is sufficient to show that the lost right had some tangible, non-negligible value. The pleadings in this case, averring a reasonable prospect of success, are sufficient to justify proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; proof before answer allowed.

Orders

  • Refusal of reclaiming motion
  • Proof before answer on the whole pleadings allowed