Watermans Property Sales LTD against Tzana Rachelle Jordan Webster (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCDUNF 36 (18 December 2025)

Watermans Property Sales LTD against Tzana Rachelle Jordan Webster (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCDUNF 36 (18 December 2025)

The pursuer's pleadings were speculative and lacked essential specification regarding the timing and nature of the alleged breaches of contract, as well as the basis for the alleged loss. Without averments of when the solicitation occurred within the restricted period or how confidential information was used, and without factual support for the likelihood of loss, the case was not relevant and could not proceed to proof.

Citation
[2026] SCDUNF 36
Parties
Pursuer: Watermans Property Sales Limited; Defender: Tzana Rachelle Jordan Webster
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil / Debate on Relevancy and Specification (plea in Law for Dismissal)
Outcome
case dismissed
Legal Topics
Restrictive Covenants, Confidentiality, Non Solicitation, Specification of Pleadings, Loss of Chance
Contract Law Employment Law Restrictive Covenants Confidentiality Non Solicitation Specification of Pleadings Loss of Chance

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Watermans Property Sales Limited

Pursuer

Tzana Rachelle Jordan Webster

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Debate on Relevancy and Specification (plea in Law for Dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's pleadings specify a relevant and adequately particularised case for breach of contract against the defender
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer has averred sufficient facts to establish breach of confidentiality and non-solicitation clauses
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer has adequately specified and justified the alleged loss

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's pleadings were speculative and lacked essential specification regarding the timing and nature of the alleged breaches of contract, as well as the basis for the alleged loss. Without averments of when the solicitation occurred within the restricted period or how confidential information was used, and without factual support for the likelihood of loss, the case was not relevant and could not proceed to proof.

Court Disposition

case dismissed

Orders

  • Defender's first plea-in-law upheld
  • Case dismissed