Appeal in the cause Cabot Financial (UK) LTD against Stephanie Hughes (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 17 (27 June 2025)

Appeal in the cause Cabot Financial (UK) LTD against Stephanie Hughes (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 17 (27 June 2025)

The sheriff was entitled to admit documentary evidence without witness testimony under Section 77 of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014. The documents established the debt, default, and assignation. The alleged defects in execution or assignation did not render the debt unenforceable or defeat Cabot's title to sue. The appeal was refused as there was no merit in any ground advanced.

Citation
[2025] SACCIV 17
Parties
Claimant and Respondent: Cabot Financial (UK) Limited; Respondent and Appellant: Stephanie Hughes
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (simple Procedure) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
appeal refused
Legal Topics
Assignation of Debt, Enforceability of Credit Agreements, Simple Procedure Evidential Rules
Debt Recovery Consumer Credit Assignation of Debt Enforceability of Credit Agreements Simple Procedure Evidential Rules

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Cabot Financial (UK) Limited

Claimant and Respondent

Stephanie Hughes

Respondent and Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (simple Procedure) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in admitting documentary evidence without witness testimony under simple procedure rules
  2. 2 Whether the debt was unenforceable due to alleged defects in the credit agreement or assignation
  3. 3 Whether Cabot had title to sue as assignee

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff was entitled to admit documentary evidence without witness testimony under Section 77 of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014. The documents established the debt, default, and assignation. The alleged defects in execution or assignation did not render the debt unenforceable or defeat Cabot's title to sue. The appeal was refused as there was no merit in any ground advanced.

Court Disposition

appeal refused

Orders

  • appeal refused
  • motion for sanction for counsel continued until expenses are dealt with