The House considered the means of imposing liability under the 1940 Act. The House was asked whether or not a draft agreement was binding notwithstanding that it had not been formally executed as apparently envisaged by the parties.
Held: No right of contribution exists under Scottish law unless the right arises out of liability on a judgment rendered by the Scottish courts. The parties’ agents ‘were proceeding upon the understanding that the binding legal obligation would be consented to in the form of execution of the formal release, in the terms satisfactory to both parties.’
Lord Mackay of Clashfern said that: ‘final mutual assent as spoken of by Lord Blackburn in Rossiter v Miller . . means mutual assent to be bound in law’.
Judges:
Lord Mackay of Clashfern
Citations:
[1987] UKHL 19, 1987 SLT 443, SC (HL) 85
Links:
Statutes:
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1940 3(2)
Jurisdiction:
Scotland
Cited by:
Cited – Farstad Supply As v Enviroco Ltd SC 5-May-2010
The defendants (E) were liable to F after a serious offshore accident, but sought a contribution from a third party (A), the main charterers, seeking to rely on section 3(2) o the 1940 Act saying that ‘if sued they might have been liable’. The court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Negligence, Contract
Updated: 22 July 2022; Ref: scu.279756