MARTIN McGOWAN AGAINST SPRINGFIELD PROPERTIES PLC [2023] ScotCS CSOH_12 (14 February 2023)

MARTIN McGOWAN AGAINST SPRINGFIELD PROPERTIES PLC [2023] ScotCS CSOH_12 (14 February 2023)

The act of interfering with a right by wrongful interdict is a continuing act for the purposes of prescription; recall of interdict by joint minute is not conclusive proof of wrongful obtaining; pursuer has relevant averments to permit proof that the interdict was wrongful, particularly regarding conduct at Milton of Campsie which was the subject of a conviction; loss averments require further specification; plea of contributory negligence is irrelevant.

Citation
[2023] ScotCS CSOH_12
Parties
Pursuer: Martin McGowan; Defender: Springfield Properties PLC
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 February 2023
Procedural Posture
Damages for Wrongful Interdict / Opinion on Preliminary Pleas and Relevancy
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed except for losses in articles 7, 8, and 9; prescription and contributory negligence pleas repelled; pursuer given opportunity to amend loss averments.
Legal Topics
Wrongful Interdict, Prescription, Damages, Contributory Negligence, Health and Safety Violations, Defamation
Civil Procedure Tort Defamation Health and Safety Wrongful Interdict Prescription Damages Contributory Negligence +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Martin McGowan

Pursuer

Springfield Properties PLC

Defender

Procedural Posture

Damages for Wrongful Interdict / Opinion on Preliminary Pleas and Relevancy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claim for damages for wrongful interdict is extinguished by prescription
  2. 2 Whether recall of interdict is conclusive proof of wrongful obtaining
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer has relevant averments to prove the interdict was wrongful

Ratio Decidendi

The act of interfering with a right by wrongful interdict is a continuing act for the purposes of prescription; recall of interdict by joint minute is not conclusive proof of wrongful obtaining; pursuer has relevant averments to permit proof that the interdict was wrongful, particularly regarding conduct at Milton of Campsie which was the subject of a conviction; loss averments require further specification; plea of contributory negligence is irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed except for losses in articles 7, 8, and 9; prescription and contributory negligence pleas repelled; pursuer given opportunity to amend loss averments.

Orders

  • Case put out by order to discuss interlocutor and further procedure
  • Opportunity for pursuer to amend loss averments