Prescription and pleadings—Court of Session considers time bar issues in defective railway claim (Highlands and Islands Enterprise v Galliford Try)

Table of contents

• What are the practical implications of this case?
• What was the background?
• What did the court decide?
• Reasonable diligence
• Scarf joint cracking
• Case details

Article summary

Construction analysis: The Scottish Court of Session considered the defender’s argument that the pursuer’s claim had prescribed, in a case concerning defects in a passenger railway. The parties’ arguments centered on the question of when the pursuer, exercising ‘reasonable diligence’, could have become aware of certain facts necessary to its claim. The court declined to find that the pursuer’s claims had prescribed, and allowed the case to proceed to a proof before answer.