DIFFERENCES IN SCOTTISH LAW, COMBINED WITH OUR TENACITY, HELP TO SETTLE CASE

· The Director claimed, amongst other things, that he was mentally not well enough to deal with the claim and did not have the means to make any offer of settlement.

· Our investigations into his means indicated that he had equity in a property in Scotland.

· After failing to provide any evidence of his ill health, we decided to issue a writ against the Director.

· The Director responded advising of a deterioration in his mental health, and that he was going to join his wife in the US for treatment.

· We asked for an independent medical report as well as corroboration of the treatment he was to receive in the US.

· The Director again failed to provide any evidence. We also became aware that the Scottish property was on the market for sale.

· We became concerned that the Director might be a flight risk and were advised by our Scottish lawyers that we could obtain an inhibition against the property, effectively freezing any proceeds if the property was sold.

· The Director indicated his intention to defend the proceedings. Nevertheless, the inhibition was granted by the Scottish Courts in our favour.

· After obtaining the inhibition the defendant contacted our lawyers to advise that the property was under offer.

· A settlement agreement was swiftly entered into, allowing the property to be sold.

· A substantial part of our claims was settled under the settlement agreement.

· The case took about 8 months from assignment to settlement. Our policy of ‘never let go’ and the ability in Scotland to obtain an inhibition prior to judgment played a large part in the success of this claim.