Rush v Fife Regional Council: SCS 1985

The sheriff’s decision to order caution was upheld, having regard to the pursuer’s conduct, the nature of his pleadings which were said to be hopelessly irrelevant and his failure to pay the expenses awarded against him in another action. Lord Justice Clerk Wheatley said: ‘Ordering caution on a man who is manifestly not in a financial position to provide any sum of substance may appear to be a draconian order, but justice has to be even handed, and on the other side of the coin it would be grossly unfair to oblige the defenders to carry on defending an obviously irrelevant action without any hope of recovering any expenses if successful, particularly against an adversary who has shown that he is prone to table all kinds of procedural motions which have no merit and no justification.’


Lord Justice Clerk Wheatley


1985 SLT 451



Cited by:

CitedAnderson v Shetland Islands Council and Another SC 29-Feb-2012
The claimant sought leave to appeal. Each party now sought security for costs against the other. Her action related to water damage to her house said to have been caused by road mprovements and building works erected by and with the approval of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice

Updated: 06 May 2022; Ref: scu.452404