Family row over chipper costs £141,000

A former chip shop operator on a Hebridean island has won more than £140,000 damages after raising a court action against his family.

John Gray sued his brother-in-law Roddy MacNeil as executor to his late father Donald who died in 2015 and owned a petrol station at Daliburgh, in South Uist, where the takeaway also operated.

Mr Gray and his wife Michelle ran the chip shop from 2005 up until 2012 when the late Mr MacNeil cut the electricity supply to the premises and refused to let him in.

The Sheriff Appeal Court in Edinburgh heard that the relationship between Mr Gray and Donald MacNeil had deteriorated for several years and by 2008 was “hostile”.

The judgment stated Mr Gray later reported the deceased to the police for a number of sexual offences “allegedly committed against named persons”.

Following a subsequent confrontation between the pair, the deceased cut the electricity supply and the chip shop was forced to cease trading.

Mr Gray raised an action at Lochmaddy Sheriff Court where a sheriff found that he and the late Mr MacNeil had verbally agreed to lease the forecourt shop at the petrol station and it would be converted into a chip shop. The lease would run for 15 years from the chip shop opening.

But the sheriff ruled that the verbal lease was invalid and the deceased was entitled to withdraw from it.

Mr Gray's lawyers challenged the finding and asked appeal sheriffs to substitute an alternative finding that it was invalid as creating a real right in the subjects but was effective in creating purely personal rights and obligations which bound the parties and the late Mr MacNeil was not entitled to withdraw.

The appeal court said they accepted that a breach of the agreement on the terms established by the sheriff may give rise to a claim for damages.

The appeal sheriffs said: “We conclude that the terms of the agreement established by the sheriff give rise to personal rights and obligations between the parties even though they could not constitute a lease without being reduced to writing."

They said they had also cometo the conclusion that breach of the terms of the agreement was sufficient to give Mr Gray a right to compensation.

They agreed to substitute the finding sought by Mr Gray ' s lawyers and awarded £141,117 against the estate.

“Relations deteriorated for several years and by 2008 were hostile”