Aberdeenshire Council v. Bruce Plant Ltd [2011] ScotSC 24 (14 April 2011)

Claims (craves 1, 2, and 3) based on documents not produced or incorporated into the pleadings lack sufficient specification and must be dismissed. However, article 6 of condescendence, supporting crave 4, contains enough detail to give fair notice and is sufficiently specified to proceed to proof.

Citation: [2011] ScotSC 24
Parties: Pursuer: Aberdeenshire Council; Defender: Bruce Plant Limited
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 14 April 2011
Procedural Posture: Civil / Debate on Preliminary Plea to Relevancy and Specification
Outcome: Defenders' preliminary plea sustained in part; craves 1, 2, and 3 dismissed; crave 4 to proceed to proof; expenses reserved.
Legal Topics: Specification of Pleadings, Production and Incorporation of Documents, Dismissal of Claims, Proof of Averments

Civil Procedure Contract Law Specification of Pleadings Production and Incorporation of Documents Dismissal of Claims Proof of Averments

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 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Aberdeenshire Council

Pursuer

Bruce Plant Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Debate on Preliminary Plea to Relevancy and Specification

Legal Issues

1 Whether the pursuers' pleadings provide sufficient specification in the absence of produced and incorporated documents
2 Whether claims based on unproduced documents should be dismissed
3 Whether article 6 of condescendence provides adequate specification for crave 4

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Defenders' preliminary plea sustained in part; craves 1, 2, and 3 dismissed; crave 4 to proceed to proof; expenses reserved.

Orders

Exclusion from probation of articles 3, 4, and 5 of condescendence for the pursuers
Dismissal of pursuers' craves 1, 2, and 3