Murray WS v Arakin Ltd [2000] ScotCS 124 (16 May 2000)

Murray WS v Arakin Ltd [2000] ScotCS 124 (16 May 2000)

It is incompetent for assignees of a defender's counterclaim to be sisted in place of the defender to prosecute the counterclaim in ongoing proceedings, as the Rules of Court only permit defenders to maintain counterclaims and do not contemplate third party assignees entering the process for this purpose.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 124
Parties
Pursuer: Tods Murray, W. S.; Defender: Arakin Limited; Minuter: Andrew McNamara; Minuter: Martin Frost
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 May 2000
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Motion (minute of Sist)
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Counterclaim, Assignation of Claim, Party Substitution, Court Rules
Civil Procedure Counterclaim Assignation of Claim Party Substitution Court 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tods Murray, W. S.

Pursuer

Arakin Limited

Defender

Andrew McNamara

Minuter

Martin Frost

Minuter

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Motion (minute of Sist)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether assignees of a defender's counterclaim can be sisted in place of the defender to prosecute the counterclaim in ongoing proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi

It is incompetent for assignees of a defender's counterclaim to be sisted in place of the defender to prosecute the counterclaim in ongoing proceedings, as the Rules of Court only permit defenders to maintain counterclaims and do not contemplate third party assignees entering the process for this purpose.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • Refused the minuters' motion to sist Andrew McNamara and Martin Frost as assignees in place of Arakin Limited in the counterclaim.
  • Granted leave to reclaim the decision.