Stewart v Ryden Residential Ltd [1999] ScotCS 73 (12 March 1999)

Stewart v Ryden Residential Ltd [1999] ScotCS 73 (12 March 1999)

The pursuer's averments, taken at face value, are sufficient to entitle her to a proof before answer on the existence of a contractual relationship and a duty of care owed by the defenders in preparing the report and insurance recommendation. The pleadings are not so irrelevant as to justify dismissal without inquiry into the facts.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 73
Parties
Pursuer: Allyson Stewart; Defender: Ryden Residential Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 March 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Damages (contract and Negligence) / Procedure Roll Hearing; Decision on Relevancy and Allowance of Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed; all pleas standing.
Legal Topics
Surveyor's Duty of Care, Implied Contractual Terms, Negligent Misstatement, Measure of Damages, Agency
Contract Law Delict (tort) Professional Negligence Surveyor's Duty of Care Implied Contractual Terms Negligent Misstatement Measure of Damages Agency

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

Parties

Allyson Stewart

Pursuer

Ryden Residential Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Damages (contract and Negligence) / Procedure Roll Hearing; Decision on Relevancy and Allowance of Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders owed a contractual and/or delictual duty of care to the pursuer in preparing a survey report and insurance recommendation
  2. 2 Whether the pleadings disclosed a relevant case for breach of contract and/or negligence
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer was entitled to rely on the insurance recommendation in the report

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's averments, taken at face value, are sufficient to entitle her to a proof before answer on the existence of a contractual relationship and a duty of care owed by the defenders in preparing the report and insurance recommendation. The pleadings are not so irrelevant as to justify dismissal without inquiry into the facts.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed; all pleas standing.

Orders

  • Parties allowed a proof before answer of their respective averments.