McMullan v. Murray & Ors [2004] ScotCS 192 (30 July 2004)

The court sustained the defenders' plea to relevancy regarding section 17, excluding related averments, but allowed preliminary proof on section 19A issues.

Citation: [2004] ScotCS 192
Parties: Pursuer: David McMullan; Defenders: Sister Bernard Mary Murray and Others
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 30 July 2004
Procedural Posture: Civil Action / Preliminary Proof Ordered
Outcome: plea to relevancy sustained in part; preliminary proof allowed
Legal Topics: Limitation of Actions, Prescription, Section 17, Section 19 a

Civil Procedure Personal Injury Limitation of Actions Prescription Section 17 Section 19 a

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

David McMullan

Pursuer

Sister Bernard Mary Murray and Others

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil Action / Preliminary Proof Ordered

Legal Issues

1 Whether the pursuer's claim is barred by section 17 of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973
2 Whether issues under section 19A of the Act warrant preliminary proof

Ratio Decidendi

The court sustained the defenders' plea to relevancy regarding section 17, excluding related averments, but allowed preliminary proof on section 19A issues.

Court Disposition

plea to relevancy sustained in part; preliminary proof allowed

Orders

Averments in Condescendence 5 excluded from further consideration
Preliminary proof allowed on averments in Condescendence and Answer 7 relating to section 19A