THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC AGAINST MOHAMMED ISLAM AND THOMAS CAMPBELL MACLENNAN [2023] ScotCS CSIH_42 (15 November 2023)

THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND PLC AGAINST MOHAMMED ISLAM AND THOMAS CAMPBELL MACLENNAN [2023] ScotCS CSIH_42 (15 November 2023)

The requirements of s 113(2) of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 are not satisfied; neither ground of appeal raises an important point of principle or practice nor provides a compelling reason for the Court of Session to hear the appeal; the sheriff and Sheriff Appeal Court were entitled to exercise their discretion, considered reasonableness under s 24(5), and were impartial; the application for permission to appeal is refused.

Citation
[2023] ScotCS CSIH_42
Parties
Pursuer: The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC; First Defender: Mohammed Aslam; Second Defender: Thomas Campbell MacLennan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal / Decision on Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Session Under S 113 of the Courts Reform (scotland) Act 2014
Outcome
application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Standard Securities, Sequestration, Vexatious Litigant, Decree by Default, Reasonableness Under S 24(5) Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (scotland) Act 1970, Lay Representation
Civil Procedure Property Law Banking Law Standard Securities Sequestration Vexatious Litigant Decree by Default Reasonableness Under S 24(5) Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (scotland) Act 1970 +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC

Pursuer

Mohammed Aslam

First Defender

Thomas Campbell MacLennan

Second Defender

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal / Decision on Application for Permission to Appeal to Court of Session Under S 113 of the Courts Reform (scotland) Act 2014

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether permission to appeal should be granted under s 113 of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in granting decree by default and immediate extract
  3. 3 Whether s 24(5) of the Conveyancing and Feudal Reform (Scotland) Act 1970 applies in default situations

Ratio Decidendi

The requirements of s 113(2) of the Courts Reform (Scotland) Act 2014 are not satisfied; neither ground of appeal raises an important point of principle or practice nor provides a compelling reason for the Court of Session to hear the appeal; the sheriff and Sheriff Appeal Court were entitled to exercise their discretion, considered reasonableness under s 24(5), and were impartial; the application for permission to appeal is refused.

Court Disposition

application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • permission to appeal to the Court of Session is refused