Hi guys, I was wondering:
Let's say if person A has a nice jacket, then they buy a new one, and person B says SIMPLY 'can I buy your jacket' (meaning the new one but not specifying), so pays for it, but then realises they were given the OLD jacket and wants to bring up a SUMMARY CAUSE, what would you advise them to do?
Is it right to advise them not to take summary cause, but take 'small claims' instead?
Also:
This is an example of civil law, if i am correct:
In a civil law case, can a person seek a prison sentence for the defender? Or is it only limited to damages (i.e payment).
I am from Scotland!
What would you recommend me to advise?
Update:PS I forgot to mention that when B bought the jacket, it broke, and that's why he seeks the lawsuit against A!
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
I would say that "B" gets his money back, and "A" keeps both jackets (unless both people agree on a price to sell the old jacket for).
There is no way a small claims suit would be successful in the States.
In a civil LAW case a plaintiff can (technically) only request money damages. However, it is often used colloquially to include a case in EQUITY in which a civil litigant may seek an equitable remedy including such things as modification or recission of a contract, specific enforcement of an agreement for unique property, or for an "injunction" to cause or prevent some action. An injunction may include seizing pirated copies, an order for a person to stay away from another person, etc. There is no provision for a civil defenant to be put in "prison", except perhaps if there is a violation of a court order (mentioned earlier), which amounts to criminal contempt of court.
For example, I could sue you for trespass and claim money for any damage you cause to my property as well as an injunction restricting you from returning. If you violate that injunction you could be charged with criminal trespass AND with contempt of court AND any additional damages. Sometimes criminal courts dabble in "damages" when they order a convict to make "resitution" to the victims.
Under old English law the writs of equity were heard in Chancellery, not court, presided over by the chancellor.