Inglis v. The National Bank of Scotland, Ltd [1909] ScotLR 730 (28 May 1909)

Averments of similar fraudulent conduct by the bank's agent against other persons are irrelevant and inadmissible; only matters directly related to the pursuer's claim may be admitted to proof.

Citation: [1909] ScotLR 730
Parties: Pursuer: William Inglis; Defender: The National Bank of Scotland, Limited
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judgment Date: 28 May 1909
Procedural Posture: Repetition / Inner House Appeal Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome: Proof allowed before answer, but averments in Condescendence 10 excluded from proof; Lord Ordinary's interlocutor affirmed with variation.
Legal Topics: Repetition, Fraud, Misrepresentation, Relevancy of Evidence

Civil Law Banking Law Evidence Repetition Fraud Misrepresentation Relevancy of Evidence

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 6

Parties

William Inglis

Pursuer

The National Bank of Scotland, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Repetition / Inner House Appeal Against Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

1 Whether averments of similar fraudulent conduct by the bank's agent against other persons are relevant to support the pursuer's claim of fraud
2 Whether evidence of custom or practice of fraud is admissible

Ratio Decidendi

Averments of similar fraudulent conduct by the bank's agent against other persons are irrelevant and inadmissible; only matters directly related to the pursuer's claim may be admitted to proof.

Court Disposition

Proof allowed before answer, but averments in Condescendence 10 excluded from proof; Lord Ordinary's interlocutor affirmed with variation.

Orders

Proof allowed of pursuer's averments except Condescendence 10.
Condescendence 10 excluded from proof.