Harrison v D M Hall & Ors [2001] ScotCS 235 (16 October 2001)
The pursuer failed to prove that a visible defect existed at the time of the defenders' inspection, and the evidence did not establish that the defenders' valuation was outside the legitimate range of professional opinion. Therefore, no negligence was established on either ground.
- Citation
- [2001] ScotCS 235
- Parties
- Pursuer: Paul Harrison; Defenders: D M Hall and Others
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 16 October 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Professional Negligence / Outer House, Court of Session Opinion After Proof
- Outcome
- Decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders; pursuer's claim dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Surveyor's Duty of Care, Standard of Care, Valuation Negligence, Damages Assessment
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Paul Harrison
Pursuer
D M Hall and Others
Defenders
Procedural Posture
Civil Professional Negligence / Outer House, Court of Session Opinion After Proof
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the defenders were negligent in failing to detect and report rot and damp in the property.
- 2 Whether the defenders negligently over-valued the property.
Ratio Decidendi
The pursuer failed to prove that a visible defect existed at the time of the defenders' inspection, and the evidence did not establish that the defenders' valuation was outside the legitimate range of professional opinion. Therefore, no negligence was established on either ground.
Court Disposition
Decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders; pursuer's claim dismissed.
Orders
- Sustain defenders' second and third pleas-in-law.
- Repel pursuer's first plea-in-law.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment