Fletcher v. Lord Advocate [1922] ScotLR 27 (27 October 1922)

Fletcher v. Lord Advocate [1922] ScotLR 27 (27 October 1922)

The pursuer's averments, if proved, are relevant to constitute a case of essential error induced by misrepresentation, as the representation that the document was merely an agreement to arbitration was inaccurate and material. The Lord Ordinary's decision to send the case to jury trial on a general issue was within his discretion and should not be interfered with.

Citation
[1922] ScotLR 27
Parties
Pursuer: John Fletcher; Defender: Lord Advocate for and on behalf of the Board of Trade
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 October 1922
Procedural Posture
Civil (reduction) / Interlocutory Appeal on Relevancy and Mode of Trial
Outcome
Lord Ordinary's interlocutor affirmed; case to proceed to jury trial on the approved issue.
Legal Topics
Essential Error, Misrepresentation, Reduction of Contract, Jury Trial, Pleading Requirements
Contract Law Civil Procedure Essential Error Misrepresentation Reduction of Contract Jury Trial Pleading Requirements

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Fletcher

Pursuer

Lord Advocate for and on behalf of the Board of Trade

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil (reduction) / Interlocutory Appeal on Relevancy and Mode of Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's averments are relevant to constitute a case of essential error induced by misrepresentation justifying reduction of the agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the case should proceed to jury trial or proof before the Lord Ordinary.
  3. 3 Whether the issue for jury must specify the alleged misrepresentation.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's averments, if proved, are relevant to constitute a case of essential error induced by misrepresentation, as the representation that the document was merely an agreement to arbitration was inaccurate and material. The Lord Ordinary's decision to send the case to jury trial on a general issue was within his discretion and should not be interfered with.

Court Disposition

Lord Ordinary's interlocutor affirmed; case to proceed to jury trial on the approved issue.

Orders

  • Affirmation of Lord Ordinary's interlocutor approving the second issue as amended and appointing jury trial.
  • No interference with the Lord Ordinary's discretion on mode of trial.