Stork Technical Services (RBG) Ltd v Ross [2015] ScotCS CSOH_10A (3 February 2015)

Stork Technical Services (RBG) Ltd v Ross [2015] ScotCS CSOH_10A (3 February 2015)

The contract for adjudication services was between the pursuers/SGL and Knights Solicitors LLP, not Mr Ross personally. Mr Ross made clear he was acting as an employee of Knights. Therefore, any claim for repayment of fees must be directed against Knights, not Mr Ross or his executor. The action against the defender is unfounded and decree of absolvitor is granted.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_10A
Parties
Pursuer: Stork Technical Services (RBG) Limited; Defender: Marion Howitson Ross, Executor of the late George Ross
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
03 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Proof
Outcome
decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the defender
Legal Topics
Adjudicator's Liability, Restitution, Contractual Parties, Failure of Purpose, Mutuality of Contract
Contract Law Unjust Enrichment Adjudicator's Liability Restitution Contractual Parties Failure of Purpose Mutuality of Contract

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stork Technical Services (RBG) Limited

Pursuer

Marion Howitson Ross, Executor of the late George Ross

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Who was the party to the contract with the pursuers and SGL: Mr Ross personally or Knights Solicitors LLP?
  2. 2 Is the pursuers' claim for repayment properly based on unjustified enrichment or contract?
  3. 3 Does reduction of the adjudicator's decision entitle the pursuers to restitution of fees paid?

Ratio Decidendi

The contract for adjudication services was between the pursuers/SGL and Knights Solicitors LLP, not Mr Ross personally. Mr Ross made clear he was acting as an employee of Knights. Therefore, any claim for repayment of fees must be directed against Knights, not Mr Ross or his executor. The action against the defender is unfounded and decree of absolvitor is granted.

Court Disposition

decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the defender

Orders

  • Pleas in law for the pursuer repelled
  • Second plea in law for the defender sustained