How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask JGM Your Own Question
JGM, Solicitor
Category: Law
Satisfied Customers: 12195
Experience:  30 years as a practising solicitor.
Type Your Law Question Here...
JGM is online now

Legal style initial writ ordinary cause scotland

This answer was rated:

legal style initial writ ordinary cause scotland
Thank you for your question. I am a solicitor in Scotland.
What is the action to be about?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.

I invented a software program that was accepted as world leader. The product needed financial backing to get to market to leverage its major potential. I met the Defender via a trusted third party. Agreements were formed between the Defender and myself, but such relied upon misrepresentations by the Defender and he later grossly breached such Agreements by deceptions and unlawful acts. The unlawful acts included criminal offences being investigated by Police Scotland. Despite destroying the entire value of the software, the Defender now prohibits me from using the property (to try and recover my livelihood or even working anywhere within my 30 year expert domain. I seek to have the Agreements annulled by reason that they were invalid as formed; and later and repeatedly grossly breached by the Defender. The Defender is a millionaire and I am now reduced to breadline (despite the fact that prior to the Defender's acts, Contracts for $5.4M USD were in advanced discussions. I seek to raise an Action to rectify all such. I have absolute proof of the Defender's misconduct and false denials / deceptions and other wrongful acts in the form of (lawfully) intercepted emails and even video/other recordings. Best regards ***** ***** John

This sounds like an action of reduction and damages. That is not something that you will easily do yourself.
What is the basis of Scottish jurisdiction? Is the defender in Scotland or does the contract choose Scots law as the governing law?
Customer: replied 2 years ago.

The Defender is domiciled in Motherwell, thus the ground of jurisdiction is Hamilton Sheriff Court. I have already concluded that the action that I seek to pursue is primarily one to obtain an Order for Reduction.


Form G1

Form of initial writ

Rule 3.1(1)(a)



AT***** Hamilton, ML3 0PT.

John Lyden,



G81 2SX



Robert MacDowell Greer





The Pursuer craves the court grants an order for Reduction of all Agreements between the Pursuer and Defender; and orders the return of all associated property and Rights including all Intellectual Property Rights by the Defender to the Pursuer.


  1. The Pursuer avers that the Court has jurisdiction upon the grounds that the Defender is domiciled in Lanarkshire.

  2. The Pursuer is John Lyden, 34, Kirkwood Avenue, Clydebank, G81 2SX.

  3. The Defender is Robert MacDowell Greer, a business person residing at***** Motherwell, ML1 1EU.

  4. The Defender asserts that Agreements were formed between Pursuer and Defender upon 4/1/2008; and that the Defender obtained such Agreements honestly.

  5. The Defender asserts that all such Agreements are valid, without defect and have full effect in Law.

  6. The Defender asserts that such Agreements grant Rights to the Defender over the Pursuer’s Intellectual Property.

  7. Relying upon such Rights, the Defender prohibits the Pursuer from doing any work as a 30 years’ domain expert in the Pursuers scientific domain; and the Defender absolutely prohibits the Pursuer from doing anything with the Property under penalties in Law.

  8. The Pursuer avers that the Defender obtained such Agreements and personal advantage therein, by false representations and that the Agreements contain defects.

  9. The Pursuer avers that the Defender is in gross, repeated and now irremediable breach of such Agreements.

  10. The Pursuer avers that the Defender covertly entered secret discussions with third parties and the Defender attempted to sell the entire property / Company for his exclusive benefit, contrary to his fiduciary duties to the Pursuer / Company.

  11. The Defender denies ever attempting to sell such and further denies entering any secret negotiations with third parties.

  12. The Defender denies any breach of the Agreements and/or any Defender wrongdoing at anytime, anywhere.

  13. All such Defender denials are provably false.

  14. The Defender refuses correspondence or discussion.

  15. This Action is therefore necessary.


  1. The Pursuer begs the Court’s indulgence over any lay error in the Pleas, but such is the result of the Pursuer’s impoverished condition whereby he cannot afford Legal advice and proceeds with only lay understanding of process.

  2. As the Defender used misrepresentations and/or knowing deceptions of the Pursuer to obtain the Agreements, such knowing and material Defender Misrepresentations render the Agreements invalid as formed.

  3. Other than by result of the Defender’s misrepresentations and/or knowing deceptions, there is no logical reason that the Pursuer or any party would accept the otherwise unbalanced and unfair Terms of such Agreements.

  4. Even if such Agreements were ever valid, at least in part, the Defender later grossly and repeatedly breached such Agreements; and such breaches beyond any alternative or equitable rectification.

  5. As such Defender breaches are so severe and fundamental, not least the Defender’s breaches of his core “Good faith” and fiduciary duties under such Agreements, such Defender breaches are irremediable and entirely void such Agreements.

  6. Such Defender breaches include gross breaches of trust, not least the Defender seeking to personally profit from items of property that were in the Defender’s fiduciary care and that he did not own.

  7. Contrary to duties of truth and proper conduct of business per CA2006, ss.170-177, the Defender knowingly, repeatedly and grossly misled the Pursuer, then his fellow Director and his shareholders, thereby breaching Law and the requirement to lawful conduct under said Agreements.

  8. Contrary to further duties of lawful conduct, the Defender committed multiple, provable criminal offences to further his objectives. Such acts grossly breached the Agreements.

  9. To cover his wrongdoing, the Defender issued multiple false denials of events and acts that can now be proven. Each of these many false denials was a further breach of the Defender’s duties under the Agreements of “Good faith” and to comply with Law.

  10. To further entrap the Pursuer, the Defender knowingly lodged multiple false statutory documents with Companies House, representing the Pursuer to be a Director when the Defender clearly and fully knew the opposite facts.

  11. All such Defender’s criminal acts are further, gross and irremediable breaches of the Defender’s duties in the Agreements and under the Companies Acts (CA2006, ss.170-177, 248 and 1112); and give further cause to dissolve all such Agreements.

  12. The Defender’s entirely destroyed the Company and value in the Pursuer’s property and such conduct again, totally breached the Agreements.

  13. The Pursuer craves that the Court restores the Pursuer’s original position of absolute ownership of what was formerly the Pursuer’s exclusive property and freedom of employment as such is necessary, reasonable, fair, equitable and just.

  14. As the Defender has wilfully, repeatedly and irremediably breached the Agreements, the Defender’s acts invalidated all such Agreements.

  15. All such Agreements should be dissolved by an Order of Reduction.


John Lyden, Pursuer.

This needs a face to face meeting between you and a solicitor. Your draft is flawed in many ways both in terms of content and structure. On the one hand you say that the Agreements are void but on the other you talk of a breach of the Agreements. You can't aver a breach where you aver there was no agreement to start with. It is also unclear what this party has actually done to justify a reduction of the agreement. You have to have very detailed averments of fraud, misrepresentation etc. and all of the facts go in the condescendence section in coherent paragraphs. The crave simply asks the court to grant whatever decree it is that is desired and the pleas in law simply say that the remedy should be pronounced as craved and why, in a single sentence usually.
It occurs to me that without a full and detailed statement from you narrating the full history of e matter, no solicitor could draft an initial writ for you nor could he establish what remedy is the correct one you are seeking. It may just be a breach of contract and damages action if in fact there are no grounds for reduction. I would normally take about two or three hours plus drafting time to deal with something like this so costs would be in the region of £750.
You would qualify for legal aid possibly and I wonder if that is an avenue you have explored because you certainly should not be doing this yourself, any more than I would attempt to write a piece of software...
JGM and other Law Specialists are ready to help you