Donnie Smith against Mairi Davidson (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 34 (14 October 2025)

Donnie Smith against Mairi Davidson (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 34 (14 October 2025)

The sheriff was correct to refuse the appellant's motion to amend the claim at the hearing due to lack of fair notice to the respondent. The sheriff's assessment of damages was rational and based on the evidence accepted. No procedural unfairness or error was demonstrated.

Citation
[2025] SACCIV 34
Parties
Claimant and Appellant: Donnie Smith; Respondent: Mairi Davidson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (simple Procedure) / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Reparation for Damage by Animals, Boundary Disputes, Procedural Fairness, Amendment of Pleadings
Tort Property Law Civil Procedure Reparation for Damage by Animals Boundary Disputes Procedural Fairness Amendment of Pleadings

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 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Donnie Smith

Claimant and Appellant

Mairi Davidson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (simple Procedure) / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sheriff erred in refusing to admit additional claim forms and amended claims
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in assessing quantum of damages for property damage caused by straying cattle
  3. 3 Whether there was procedural unfairness in the conduct of the hearing

Ratio Decidendi

The sheriff was correct to refuse the appellant's motion to amend the claim at the hearing due to lack of fair notice to the respondent. The sheriff's assessment of damages was rational and based on the evidence accepted. No procedural unfairness or error was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • Appellant found liable to respondent in the expenses of the appeal, as taxed.