Fraser v. The Professional Golfers' Association Ltd [2005] ScotCS CSIH_42 (31 May 2005)

Fraser v. The Professional Golfers' Association Ltd [2005] ScotCS CSIH_42 (31 May 2005)

The pursuer's pleadings provided adequate specification regarding the alleged breach of the implied contractual term, giving the defenders fair notice of the case against them. The Lord Ordinary erred in dismissing the action for lack of specification.

Citation
[2005] ScotCS CSIH_42
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Colin Fraser; Defenders and Respondents: The Professional Golfers' Association Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Appeal From Dismissal on Relevancy and Specification
Outcome
Reclaiming motion allowed; interlocutor of dismissal recalled in part; proof before answer allowed except as specified.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Fair Assessment, Professional Examinations, Pleadings Specification, Negligence
Contract Law Professional Regulation Implied Terms Fair Assessment Professional Examinations Pleadings Specification Negligence

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Fraser

Pursuer and Reclaimer

The Professional Golfers' Association Limited

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Appeal From Dismissal on Relevancy and Specification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's pleadings provided sufficient specification regarding the alleged breach of an implied contractual term to assess his examination performance fairly and reasonably by the standards of a competent professional golf club repairer.
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Ordinary erred in dismissing the action for lack of specification.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's pleadings provided adequate specification regarding the alleged breach of the implied contractual term, giving the defenders fair notice of the case against them. The Lord Ordinary erred in dismissing the action for lack of specification.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion allowed; interlocutor of dismissal recalled in part; proof before answer allowed except as specified.

Orders

  • Recall the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor of 12 March 2004 in so far as it sustained the first plea in law for the defenders and dismissed the action.
  • Sustain the first plea in law for the defenders only to the extent of refusing probation to specified averments in Article 12 and the whole of Article 13 of the Condescendence.