Scotland Cases

This page shows all the Scottish cases by default, but you can filter the list by using the search tool above. You can search within the title, key terms, court name, judge's name and case notes fields by inputting a word, or words, or part of a word, or a phrase, into the search box.

  • 30th May 2002
    VA Tech Wabag UK Ltd v Morgan Ltd [2002] CA 46/02
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit The fact that the pursuer (claimant) could have proceeded to adjudication to recover sums due to it did not prevent the Court granting an interim injunction to stop the defenders hindering the release of funds from a joint account. Opinion of Lord Drummond Young, Outer House, Court of Session 30 May 2002 V and M were part of a construction consortium to design, procure and construct a sludge treatment plant. Payments for the work were made into a joint account. M claimed that it had carried out ancillary services which were part of V's share of the works and proposed certain adjustments to the payment due under two payment certificates. V disputed this, and M refused to consent to or assist in the distribution of monies to V from the joint account...
  • 3rd May 2002
    Barry D Trentham Ltd v Lawfield Investments Ltd [2002] Ct of Session A 680 /02
  • 22nd March 2002
    Fab-Tek Engineering Ltd v Carillion Construction Ltd [2002] Dunfermline Sheriff Court
  • 8th February 2002
    Quality Street Properties Ltd v Elmwood [2002] 258/2002 S
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit Reaching a compromise agreement in relation to a dispute, which might otherwise be referred to adjudication, could oust the jurisdiction of an adjudicator, as there would no longer be a dispute. Sheriff Principal Edward Bowen QC 8 February 2002 This was an appeal from a first instance decision of the Sheriff denying Q an injunction to stop E from appointing an Adjudicator pursuant to a Scottish Minor Works Contract. The Contract Works involved alterations to properties in Glasgow, which were completed in November 1999. Following completion of the works E started an action in Court against Q for sums it believed were owed to it under the Final Account. Q lodged detailed defences the substance of which were that the Contract Price had been the subject...
  • 31st January 2002
    Clark Contracts v Burrell Ltd No 2 [2002] A7038/00
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit An Interim Certificate under the JCT forms is not conclusive evidence as to the amount due, but the sum stated as due in it is still a "sum due under the contract" and payment of it is due in accordance with the terms of the JCT contracts Sherriff James A Taylor January 2002, Court of Session B employed C by a contract in relation to the re-development of 8 flats in Glasgow. The contract was governed by SBCC Design Portion with Quantities (September 1997 Revision) Building Contract with Scottish Supplement 1980 (Revised, July 1997) to the conditions of the Standard Form of Building Contract 1980 Edition with Quantities. The architects engaged by B issued Interim Certificate No. 11 in the gross amount of £486,529.42. Net of retention the sum...
  • 22nd January 2002
    Karl Construction Ltd v Sweeney Civil Eng. Ltd [2002] SLT 312P/872/00
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit The adjudicator is not fettered, when applying the relevant law, by the parties' representations: it is open to the adjudicator to reach a conclusion different from that agreed by the parties. A failure by the adjudicator to seek further representations from the parties before reaching a conclusion different from their agreed position is not necessarily a breach of the rules of natural justice. Extra Division, Inner House, Court of Session Lord Marnoch, Lord Dawson, Lord Clarke 22 January 2002 The petitioners (K) brought a reclaiming motion against the dismissal by the Lord Ordinary of a petition for judicial review of an adjudicator's decision under the HGCR Act 1996. The facts of the case and decision by the Lord Ordinary are set out on page...
  • 8th August 2001
    Stiell Facilities Limited v Sir Robert McAlpine Limited [2001] ScotHC 82
  • 7th August 2001
    Maxi Construction Ltd v Mortons Rolls Ltd [2001] Outer Ct of Session
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit To constitute a claim for payment pursuant to paragraph 12 of the Scheme the relevant application must be an application for payment, not simply an application for valuation and certification. It must also state the basis on which the payment claimed was calculated. Lord Macfadyen, Outer House, Court of Session 7 August 2001 MC carried out certain construction works for MR. The contract between the parties was a construction contract within the meaning of HGCR Act 1996. MC contended they were entitled to an interim payment on the basis of a document they called "Application for Payment 10" and decree de plano (judgment granted in all respects) should be pronounced. MR contended that the document relied on by MC did not constitute an application for...
  • 17th July 2001
    City Inn Ltd v Shepherd Construction Ltd [2001] Outer House. CA 101/00
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit An adjudicator's decision does not affect the burden of proof in arbitration or court proceedings. Lord MacFadyen, Outer House, Court of Session 17 July 2001 CIL engaged SCL as the contractor for the construction of a hotel in Bristol under an amended JCT Standard Form of Building Contract Private Edition with Quantities (1980 Edition). The project over-ran. The Architect certified SCL an extension of time of 4 weeks. An adjudicator granted SCL a further 5 weeks. The dispute went to court, CIL contesting both the 4 week and 5 week extensions of time, claiming liquidated and ascertained damages and repayment of loss and expense certified by the Architect. SCL said that the adjudicator's decision threw the burden of proof on to CIL to show that the...
  • 5th July 2001
    British Waterways Board [2001] ScotCS 182
    This summary was provided by CMS Cameron McKenna LLP. For more information visit In Scotland at least, an interim order preventing for a time the commencement of adjudication proceedings can be obtained, on the basis that there is no dispute which can properly be referred to adjudication at that time. To get such an order a party will have to show that the balance of convenience favours delaying the adjudication Lord McCluskey, Outer House, Court of Session 5 July 2001 The petitioner sought an interim order to prevent the respondent, for a time, from commencing an adjudication. Lord McCluskey began by saying that, when interim orders in petitions for judicial review are sought, the court must be satisfied that the petitioners have a prima facie case, that is, a case to try. If this succeeds, the court will look at where the...