Purdie & Anor v Dryburgh [2000] ScotCS 118 (10 May 2000)

Purdie & Anor v Dryburgh [2000] ScotCS 118 (10 May 2000)

The additional cost incurred by the pursuers for piling foundations was a direct and foreseeable consequence of the defender's negligent advice. The evidence showed the pursuers would not have proceeded with the project had they known of the need for piling. Therefore, the defender is liable for the full amount awarded.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 118
Parties
Pursuer: David C. Purdie; Pursuer: Mrs. Isobel G. H. Purdie; Defender: Scott Dryburgh
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 May 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
appeal refused; interlocutor affirmed
Legal Topics
Professional Negligence, Damages, Breach of Contract

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

David C. Purdie

Pursuer

Mrs. Isobel G. H. Purdie

Pursuer

Scott Dryburgh

Defender

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Judgment on Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the defender is liable for additional costs incurred by the pursuers due to negligent advice regarding foundation type for house construction.
  2. 2 Whether the damages awarded should be reduced on the basis that the pursuers would have incurred the cost of piling regardless of the defender's advice.

Ratio Decidendi

The additional cost incurred by the pursuers for piling foundations was a direct and foreseeable consequence of the defender's negligent advice. The evidence showed the pursuers would not have proceeded with the project had they known of the need for piling. Therefore, the defender is liable for the full amount awarded.

Court Disposition

appeal refused; interlocutor affirmed

Orders

  • The appeal is refused.
  • The interlocutor of the Sheriff Principal is affirmed.