Ross Harper & Murphy & Ors v Banks [2000] ScotCS 131 (24 May 2000)

The court allowed proof before answer except as disposed of by the interlocutor of 11 May, finding the defender's arguments insufficient to prevent proof on the pursuers' primary case, and granted leave to reclaim due to the general importance of the issues.

Citation: [2000] ScotCS 131
Parties: Pursuers: Ross Harper & Murphy and Others; Defender: Scott Banks
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 24 May 2000
Procedural Posture: Civil Action / Interlocutory; Leave to Reclaim Granted
Outcome: Proof before answer allowed except as disposed of by interlocutor of 11 May; leave to reclaim granted.
Legal Topics: Duty of Care, Professional Indemnity, Pleas in Law, Proof Before Answer

Professional Negligence Duty of Care Professional Indemnity Pleas in Law Proof Before Answer

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 Party arguments 2

Parties

Ross Harper & Murphy and Others

Pursuers

Scott Banks

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Interlocutory; Leave to Reclaim Granted

Legal Issues

1 Whether a duty of care more exacting than standard formulations applies to the defender
2 Relevancy of the pursuers' primary case in Article 5
3 Implications for professional indemnity policies

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed except as disposed of by interlocutor of 11 May; leave to reclaim granted.

Orders

Proof before answer allowed on averments except those excluded by interlocutor of 11 May.
Leave to reclaim granted against interlocutors of 11 May and 24 May.