Mclean Or Torremar v. CGU Bonus Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSIH_42 (29 June 2011)

Mclean Or Torremar v. CGU Bonus Ltd [2011] ScotCS CSIH_42 (29 June 2011)

Motion refused due to lack of cogent evidence that respondents possess or know whereabouts of sauna heater casing; no grounds for fresh evidence on appeal established.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSIH_42
Parties
Reclaimer and Motioner: Mrs Kathleen Mary Selena McLean or Torremar; Defenders and Respondents: CGU Bonus Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
29 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Motion in Appeal / Inner House, Court of Session, Post Proof
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Indemnity Under Insurance Policy, Production of Evidence, Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Insurance Law Civil Procedure Indemnity Under Insurance Policy Production of Evidence Fresh Evidence on Appeal

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

Mrs Kathleen Mary Selena McLean or Torremar

Reclaimer and Motioner

CGU Bonus Limited

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Motion in Appeal / Inner House, Court of Session, Post Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether respondents possess the outer casing of sauna heater
  2. 2 Whether order for production of casing should be granted
  3. 3 Whether fresh evidence can be led before Inner House

Ratio Decidendi

Motion refused due to lack of cogent evidence that respondents possess or know whereabouts of sauna heater casing; no grounds for fresh evidence on appeal established.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • No order for production of sauna heater casing