M'gregor v. M'laughlin [1905] ScotLR 43_77 (17 November 1905)

M'gregor v. M'laughlin [1905] ScotLR 43_77 (17 November 1905)

As there was no averment of malice on record and the facts excluded malice, the pursuer's statement disclosed no issuable matter; action dismissed as irrelevant. Innocent mistakes in legal proceedings do not give rise to liability for damages.

Citation
[1905] ScotLR 43_77
Parties
Defender: Edward M'Laughlin; Pursuer: William M'Gregor
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
17 November 1905
Procedural Posture
Reparation (damages) / Appeal (reclaiming Note) Against Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary
Outcome
action dismissed
Legal Topics
Damages for Wrongful Decree, Malice in Legal Proceedings, Service of Summons, Decree in Absence, Relevancy of Pleadings
Civil Procedure Tort Damages for Wrongful Decree Malice in Legal Proceedings Service of Summons Decree in Absence Relevancy of Pleadings

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward M'Laughlin

Defender

William M'Gregor

Pursuer

Procedural Posture

Reparation (damages) / Appeal (reclaiming Note) Against Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is a party liable in damages for obtaining a decree in absence when the summons was not properly served, absent averment of malice?
  2. 2 Does the absence of malice or malevolent intention preclude liability for damages in such cases?

Ratio Decidendi

As there was no averment of malice on record and the facts excluded malice, the pursuer's statement disclosed no issuable matter; action dismissed as irrelevant. Innocent mistakes in legal proceedings do not give rise to liability for damages.

Court Disposition

action dismissed

Orders

  • Lord Ordinary's interlocutor recalled
  • action dismissed as irrelevant