Sexton & Anor v. Coia & Anor [2004] ScotCS 19 (27 January 2004)

Sexton & Anor v. Coia & Anor [2004] ScotCS 19 (27 January 2004)

The pursuers' pleadings are fundamentally irrelevant as they have not relevantly averred a valid title to the disputed subjects. The charter of novodamus and related dispositions in 1995 and 1996 could not confer a real right on the pursuers, as Gusto Coia had only a personal right and had not completed title under Section 10 of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1874. The pursuers' claims to be bona fide purchasers or to have acquired title by positive prescription are also without merit. Accordingly, the defenders' motion for dismissal is well-founded.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 19
Parties
Pursuer: John Sexton; Pursuer: Maureen Allan; Defender: Marco Coia; Defender: Carmela Rosina Coia
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 January 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Property/title Dispute / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy and Prescription, Motion for Dismissal
Outcome
Pursuers' pleadings held irrelevant; defenders' motion for dismissal well-founded; case put out By Order to consider amendment.
Legal Topics
Ex Facie Absolute Disposition, Title to Heritage, Prescription, Charter of Novodamus, Bona Fide Purchaser, Positive Prescription, Personal and Real Rights, Reduction and Declarator
Property Law Conveyancing Trusts and Succession Ex Facie Absolute Disposition Title to Heritage Prescription Charter of Novodamus Bona Fide Purchaser +3 more

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Sexton

Pursuer

Maureen Allan

Pursuer

Marco Coia

Defender

Carmela Rosina Coia

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Property/title Dispute / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy and Prescription, Motion for Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuers have relevantly averred title to the disputed property at 27 and 29 Main Street, Coatbridge
  2. 2 Whether the charter of novodamus and related dispositions in 1995 and 1996 conferred a real right on the pursuers
  3. 3 Whether the defenders' argument on prescription extinguishing the creditor's right is factually and legally sustainable

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuers' pleadings are fundamentally irrelevant as they have not relevantly averred a valid title to the disputed subjects. The charter of novodamus and related dispositions in 1995 and 1996 could not confer a real right on the pursuers, as Gusto Coia had only a personal right and had not completed title under Section 10 of the Conveyancing (Scotland) Act 1874. The pursuers' claims to be bona fide purchasers or to have acquired title by positive prescription are also without merit. Accordingly, the defenders' motion for dismissal is well-founded.

Court Disposition

Pursuers' pleadings held irrelevant; defenders' motion for dismissal well-founded; case put out By Order to consider amendment.

Orders

  • Case to be put out By Order to allow pursuers to move for receipt of their Minute of Amendment; if amendment not allowed or new averments held irrelevant, action will be dismissed.