Earlier this week the Scottish Government was found liable for compensation claims from tenant farmers in a case that has dragged on for years.
Tenant farmers involved in the long running Salvesen Riddell debacle have scored a partial victory in their legal case against the Scottish government for compensation following the loss of their farms.
The Court of Session ruled this week that the Government were liable to compensate the tenants “.. for loss directly arising from reasonable reliance upon defective legislation passed by it, which was then remedied by further legislation which interfered with the individuals’ rights”.
Lord Clark rejected the tenants’ claims based on the value of the tenancy and but accepted that compensation should be paid in respect of specific losses directly sustained by the tenants who had acted in good faith on defective legislation and “for frustration and inconvenience”.
Lord Clark also pointed out that both sides had agreed that the case had been brought to establish the principle of whether or not the tenants were entitled to compensation.
As a consequence he was not in a position to quantify the scale of the compensation which he noted would have to take several factors into account, such as any capital investment they may have made in the holdings balanced by the fact that they had enjoyed an extended tenure beyond which they would have originally expected.
'Incredibly complex case'
Commenting on the court ruling, Scottish Tenant Farmers Association (STFA) director Angus McCall said: “This is an incredibly complex case and it will take some time for the tenants’ legal team to evaluate Lord Clark’s ruling.
“What has been made clear, however, is that the tenants are due some compensation for the harm caused to them by the flawed legislation instigated by the Liberal/Labour coalition and passed by the Scottish parliament 14 years ago.
“STFA urged the Scottish government to engage with the affected tenants to reach a mutually agreeable settlement, which will “take away the need to spend yet more time and money in litigation where the only beneficiaries will be the legal profession.”
