SEMPLE FRASER v. IAN QUAYLE [2001] ScotSC 5 (31st January, 2001)

SEMPLE FRASER v. IAN QUAYLE [2001] ScotSC 5 (31st January, 2001)

The test for a consumer contract is whether the contract is for the private consumption of the recipient; if it is connected to the recipient's trade or profession, it is not a consumer contract. The pursuers are entitled to a proof before answer on their averments regarding the defender's capacity. However, the pursuers must provide further specification of the sum sued for to give the defender fair notice.

Citation
[2001] ScotSC 5
Parties
Pursuer: Semple Fraser WS; Defender: Ian Quayle
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Decision on Jurisdiction and Specification
Outcome
Case put out by order for further procedure; proof before answer allowed on pursuers' averments; pursuers required to address specification of quantification.
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction, Consumer Contracts, Professional Fees, Pleadings Specification
Civil Procedure Contract Law Jurisdiction Consumer Contracts Professional Fees Pleadings Specification

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Semple Fraser WS

Pursuer

Ian Quayle

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Decision on Jurisdiction and Specification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the contract between the parties was a consumer contract for jurisdictional purposes under the Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers provided sufficient specification of the sum sued for

Ratio Decidendi

The test for a consumer contract is whether the contract is for the private consumption of the recipient; if it is connected to the recipient's trade or profession, it is not a consumer contract. The pursuers are entitled to a proof before answer on their averments regarding the defender's capacity. However, the pursuers must provide further specification of the sum sued for to give the defender fair notice.

Court Disposition

Case put out by order for further procedure; proof before answer allowed on pursuers' averments; pursuers required to address specification of quantification.

Orders

  • Case put out by order for discussion on expenses and further procedure.
  • Pursuers to provide further specification of the sum sued for if proof is to be allowed.