Outer House case considering an agricultural lease of Rockside Farm at Bruichladdich on Islay. The tenants were Rockside Farming Company (of which Mr and Mrs French were directors). The farm had been owned by one owner but, following the grant of the lease, part of the farm (776.5ha) was sold to Crewpace. The remaining part (14.5ha) was sold to Mr and Mrs French with the result that both Crewpace and Mr and Mrs French became landlords under a single lease. Mr and Mrs Fre ...
|
Reasonableness of dismissal: The claimant, an employee of the Council, was dismissed following the discovery that she had presented herself as homeless and made an application for the 'right-to-buy' a property, despite already owning a property which she had not disclosed on the application form. The Tribunal held that the respondent had conducted a reasonable investigation into the matters, that there was a genuine belief that the claimant had not disclosed material which she ought t ...
|
Disability Discrimination - Reasonable adjustments: The claimant went off sick due to stress caused by the working practices at the respondent. Grievances were initially not dealt with and an occupational health report concluded that the claimant would not be able to return to her job nor indeed do alternative work within the respondent but did not consider that the claimant met the criteria for ill-health retirement. The claimant eventually resigned on the same day that her sick pay ...
|
The manufacturer and distributor of a games console were entitled to summary judgment against a company and its sole director pursuant to the circumvention of copy-protection provisions contained in ss. 296ZD and 296 CDPA 1988, where the defendants had imported and dealt in devices which enabled the playing of unlawful copies of games on the consoles. S.296ZD provided for strict liability and the fact that the devices could be used for a non-infringing purpose was not a defence provided one of t ...
|
The Claimant was an investment banker who worked on a freelance basis. The Defendant was retained to find investors for a company and agreed with the Claimant that he would act as a sub-broker and receive 70% of the brokerage fee due to the Defendant. The Claimant identified a potential investor and introduced him. This potential investor in turn introduced a further investor who did invest in the company. The company was unable to meet the Defendant’s fee because it did not have the assets. The ...
|
The claimant was an insurance broking company involved in insuring aviation risks with an international presence. It was one of the four main companies in that market, together with the first defendant and other such companies. It was common ground that 16 of the claimant's employees resigned from the claimant's employ and moved to the first defendant. The claimant brought proceedings against the defendants, alleging that the first defendant had carried out what was commonly called a 'team poach ...
|
The advice of Counsel to accept an offer to setztle in respect of a professional negligence arising out of a time-barred clinical negligence case was advice to be expected of a reasonably competent solicitor or barrister and was in fact very good advice.
|
Appeal from the Sheriff Court:- The pursuers were the landowners of an area of woodland in Fortrose. On 7 November 2005 the defenders served on the pursuers a notice under section 14(2) of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 requiring the landowner to take certain remedial action specified in the notice in relation to various provisions respecting public rights of access to land for recreational purposes. The notice required the pursuers to allow equestrian access to the track in question in add ...
|
Practice and Procedure - Disclosure Disclosure of specific documents is necessary where evidence in a different employee’s grievance, of a “smoking gun” supporting the Claimant’s case of race discrimination, is found and sought to be pursued. Employment Judge’s refusal set aside and a fresh narrower application granted.
|
The Pursuers/Appellents raised a small claim action for damages after the arrival of their baggage was delayed for 48 hours. They sought out of pocket expenses and also compensation for stress, inconvenience and disruption to their holiday. At the preliminary hearing the Sheriff had noted that there was no dispute on the facts but the issue was whether the court had jurisdiction and, if it did, whether the Defenders were protected under the Montreal Convention 1999, which, it was accepted, gover ...
|
| 1 2 |