Thomson v. Bank Of Scotland [2007] ScotSC 56 (17 October 2007)

Thomson v. Bank Of Scotland [2007] ScotSC 56 (17 October 2007)

The disputed calls in the specification of documents were refused as they amounted to fishing diligence, lacking sufficient relevancy and specification, and would impose a disproportionate burden on the defenders given the value of the claim under the small claim procedure.

Citation
[2007] ScotSC 56
Parties
Pursuer: Aaron Hamish Thomson; Defender: Bank of Scotland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Incidental Application for Commission and Diligence / Interlocutory Decision on Recovery of Documents
Outcome
Application partially granted and partially refused
Legal Topics
Commission and Diligence, Recovery of Documents, Penalty Clauses, Fishing Diligence
Civil Procedure Contract Law Commission and Diligence Recovery of Documents Penalty Clauses Fishing Diligence

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

Parties

Aaron Hamish Thomson

Pursuer

Bank of Scotland

Defender

Procedural Posture

Incidental Application for Commission and Diligence / Interlocutory Decision on Recovery of Documents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's specification of documents constitutes fishing diligence
  2. 2 Whether the calls for documents are relevant and sufficiently specified
  3. 3 Whether the burden imposed on the defenders is disproportionate to the value of the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The disputed calls in the specification of documents were refused as they amounted to fishing diligence, lacking sufficient relevancy and specification, and would impose a disproportionate burden on the defenders given the value of the claim under the small claim procedure.

Court Disposition

Application partially granted and partially refused

Orders

  • Application granted in respect of call (a)
  • Application refused in respect of calls (b), (c), (d), and 2