BP Exploration Operating Co Ltd & Ors v. Chevron Shipping Company & Ors [2002] ScotCS 291 (13 November 2002)

BP Exploration Operating Co Ltd & Ors v. Chevron Shipping Company & Ors [2002] ScotCS 291 (13 November 2002)

The Lord Ordinary has no power to order separation of proof under Rule of Court 36.1 after the House of Lords has ordered proof before answer of all averments, as this would vary the appellate order, which is not permitted. Even if competent, separation would not be convenient or efficient in the circumstances.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 291
Parties
Pursuer: BP Exploration Operating Company Limited; Pursuer: BP Exploration Company; Defender: Chevron Shipping Company; Defender: Chevron Transport Corporation; Defender: Chevron Tankers (Bermuda) Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
13 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Motion Regarding Separation of Proof
Outcome
motions refused
Legal Topics
Separation of Proof, Powers of Court After Appellate Order, Reparation for Damage, Procedural Competency
Civil Procedure Maritime Law Separation of Proof Powers of Court After Appellate Order Reparation for Damage Procedural Competency

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BP Exploration Operating Company Limited

Pursuer

BP Exploration Company

Pursuer

Chevron Shipping Company

Defender

Chevron Transport Corporation

Defender

Chevron Tankers (Bermuda) Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Motion Regarding Separation of Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Lord Ordinary has power to order separation of proof after House of Lords' order for proof before answer of all averments
  2. 2 Whether it is appropriate or convenient to order separation of proof in the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The Lord Ordinary has no power to order separation of proof under Rule of Court 36.1 after the House of Lords has ordered proof before answer of all averments, as this would vary the appellate order, which is not permitted. Even if competent, separation would not be convenient or efficient in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

motions refused

Orders

  • Motions for separation of proof in each case refused