The pursuer and the defenders were parties to a loan agreement, entered into on 20 June 2007; the loan enabled the pursuer to buy shares in Kenmore Property Group Limited, a company in which the pursuer was a director. Under the agreement, a clause gave the defender discretion to waive re-payment of the loan, and if that discretion was undertaken, the defender was to indemnify the pursuer from any tax liability that arose there from. The repayment of the loan was duly waived, and the pursuer s ...
|
The defenders were a club, whose members had purchased the use of timeshare apartments situated on the edge of Loch Rannoch. The pursuers were a company set up in 2002 specifically for the purposes of managing the business of the defenders, a relationship which was regulated by a “Management Agreement”. This Management Agreement was brought to an end by rescission letter in October 2008, following disagreements that had arisen between the parties. In this action, the pursuers dispute ...
|
The parties entered into an agreement in May 2005 whereby the pursuer (and appellant) was to design and construct a timber framed riding arena for the defenders (and respondents). First Instance Proceedings: The pursuer sought decree for payment of outstanding sums. He averred that the price agreed was to be the amount it would cost him to build the arena and that it cost him £53,219.57 to do so. The defenders submitted that the price was to be £21,000 as well as any sums for additi ...
|
The defenders (and appellants) were a construction development company. The pursuers (and respondents) were subcontractors of the defenders. In July 2008 the pursuers issued a payment claim for building and ancillary works carried out for the defenders in Motherwell. The defenders resisted payment and issued a Notice of Withholding in respect of six items. The dispute was referred to adjudication where it was decided that the defenders were entitled to withhold payment in respect of two items bu ...
|
The pursuers and reclaimers to this action were specialists in the extrusion of pipes; they manufactured an ordinary extruded pipe, made from carbon steel, known as the Ex pipe. The defenders and respondents were engaged in the design, manufacture and supply of pipeline components, including pipes. They had developed a patented process for the manufacture of clad co-extruded pipes, known as the Proclad Wex pipe. In early 2002, the respondents approached the reclaimers, with a view working toge ...
|
In November 1999 the respondent entered into an option agreement to purchase up to 21.1 acres of land from a vendor. In October 2003 the reclaimer concluded missives with the respondent to purchase from it 4.685 acres of that land at a price of £571,314. Clause 4.1.10, introduced in the respondent's qualified acceptance of 24 September 2003, contained a suspensive condition, which provided that the missives would be essentially conditional upon the seller (the respondent) “agreeing a ...
|
The pursuers and respondents (hereafter ‘the pursuers’) were a plumbing and heating company. The defenders and appellants (hereafter ‘the defenders’) were a housing development company. The parties entered into a contract under which the pursuers were to carry out plumbing and heating works at a development of sixty five flats to be constructed in three separate blocks by the defenders. Work was completed by the pursuers, without defect or complaint, on the first and sec ...
|
The defenders ran the Castle Terrace car park in Edinburgh, which was owned by the City of Edinburgh Council and leased to the defenders. The Castle Terrace car park was successful and profit-making, and the defenders proposed to develop it further. The defenders submitted that the pursuers had represented that because of their close links with the Council, they would be uniquely placed to deliver the proposed development of the Castle Terrace car park. The parties agreed that in exchange for th ...
|
Prior to June 2005 both parties were involved in the business of the manufacture and sale of paper products. These products included board which had a smooth coating, making it suitable for high quality printing to produce e.g. greeting cards, catalogues and packaging for cosmetics and pharmaceuticals etc. In June 2005, the pursuers agreed to acquire the defenders’ Gemini brand of paper board and its goodwill, together with customer information related to the brand and certain related as ...
|
The reclaimers were whisky distillers. The respondents were beverage distributors, who operated in the United States of America. The parties entered into a Distributorship Agreement, in which the reclaimers granted to the respondents the exclusive right to purchase John Barr Scotch Whiskies in bottles for resale in the domestic market of the United States of America. The reclaimers averred that in order lawfully to distribute and sell alcohol in the United States of America, the respondents wo ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 |