No stays in Scotland

[goforit]

Deleted

[goforit]

I think this is wrong- its called res judicata and the Govan Law Centre has a post here

Sheriff Principal rejects banks' defence of res judicata | GLC July 2007

 

The Sheriff ruled that each charge was a wrongful act and therefore each was actionable.

But this decision is only applicable in Tayside, Central and Fife!

 

However as Bigmac says if you can wait till January you can go after much more at each sitting.

 

That was actually Sheriff Principal Dunlop's opinion, on appeal.

 

If my knowledge of precedant is correct, that opinion is binding on Sheriff's in that Sheriffdom (i.e. Tayside Central and Fife). However, the opinion can still be cited as a persuasive authority in other Sheriffdoms.

 

I believe the ratio of the decision was that each charge (insofar as wrongful) represented a separate cause of action. Therefore it was theoretically acceptable to raise subsequent individual action in respect of each charge (or, in normal practice, to "divide" the actions into blocks of just under £750.00 and raise them one after another).

 

HTH

[goforit]

I think this is wrong- its called res judicata and the Govan Law Centre has a post here

Sheriff Principal rejects banks' defence of res judicata | GLC July 2007

 

The Sheriff ruled that each charge was a wrongful act and therefore each was actionable.

But this decision is only applicable in Tayside, Central and Fife!

 

However as Bigmac says if you can wait till January you can go after much more at each sitting.

 

Also res judicata is latin for "a matter already judged" (roughly translated, I believe) so that would be the banks defence to your subsequent actions (which has been rejected by Tayside Central and Fife's Sheriff Principal) - not a plea that you would table.