Pursuer vs Lord Advocate

This case concerned a dispute over the award of expenses and the conduct of the pursuer in a commercial litigation case.

TLDR:

• The pursuer filed a lawsuit against the Lord Advocate.
• The court had to decide on the award of expenses and assess the pursuer's conduct.
• The court found in favor of the pursuer but imposed a 50% restriction on the award of expenses due to improper conduct.

The claimant, referred to as the pursuer, initiated legal proceedings against the Lord Advocate. The case involved issues related to the award of expenses and the pursuer's conduct during the litigation.

During the trial, the court examined the evidence and found that the pursuer had provided false evidence in an attempt to portray himself as a budding entrepreneur. This conduct was deemed improper and unreasonable.

The court considered whether it would be appropriate to restrict the award of expenses in favor of the pursuer. It concluded that a significant restriction was necessary due to the pursuer's false evidence and its impact on the overall case.

In addition, the court determined that the pursuer's conduct was so egregious that further restriction of the award of expenses was warranted. The court rejected the pursuer's argument that he had already been 'punished' by the court's rejection of his evidence.

The court decided to impose a single global restriction of 50% on the award of expenses in favor of the pursuer. This decision was based on the significant impact of the pursuer's false evidence on the case.

The court also addressed the issue of contempt of court. It concluded that it would be unnecessary and disproportionate to instigate contempt of court proceedings against the pursuer, given the existing penalties imposed.

Ultimately, the court granted decree for payment to the pursuer by the Lord Advocate of the sum of £516,755.61, with interest to run at the judicial rate from 15 March 2024 until payment. The court also certified Stuart Andrews and Simon Cuerden as skilled persons.