Wright v. Paton Farrell & Ors [2002] ScotCS 341 (27 August 2002)

Wright v. Paton Farrell & Ors [2002] ScotCS 341 (27 August 2002)

At the time of the criminal trial, Scottish law conferred immunity from suit on solicitors acting as advocates in court for negligence in the conduct of litigation, based on binding authority (Batchelor v Pattison & Mackersy, Anderson v HMA). The subsequent English decision in Hall v Simmons does not alter the Scottish position. Public policy in Scotland continues to justify such immunity, and it is not inconsistent with Article 6(1) ECHR. Accordingly, the pursuer's action is dismissed as irrelevant due to immunity.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 341
Parties
Pursuer: Trevor Rush McCafferty Wright; Defenders: Paton Farrell and Others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil (professional Negligence) / Procedure Roll (preliminary Pleas)
Outcome
action dismissed
Legal Topics
Advocate/solicitor Immunity, Miscarriage of Justice, Loss of Chance, Human Rights (echr Article 6), Duty of Care, Damages
Professional Negligence Criminal Law Legal Profession Advocate/solicitor Immunity Miscarriage of Justice Loss of Chance Human Rights (echr Article 6) Duty of Care +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 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Trevor Rush McCafferty Wright

Pursuer

Paton Farrell and Others

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil (professional Negligence) / Procedure Roll (preliminary Pleas)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a solicitor acting as advocate in a criminal trial in Scotland enjoys immunity from suit for negligence in conduct of the trial
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's pleadings disclose a relevant case of loss and causation for damages in professional negligence
  3. 3 Whether such immunity is compatible with Article 6(1) ECHR

Ratio Decidendi

At the time of the criminal trial, Scottish law conferred immunity from suit on solicitors acting as advocates in court for negligence in the conduct of litigation, based on binding authority (Batchelor v Pattison & Mackersy, Anderson v HMA). The subsequent English decision in Hall v Simmons does not alter the Scottish position. Public policy in Scotland continues to justify such immunity, and it is not inconsistent with Article 6(1) ECHR. Accordingly, the pursuer's action is dismissed as irrelevant due to immunity.

Court Disposition

action dismissed

Orders

  • Second plea in law for the defenders (immunity) sustained
  • Action dismissed