News
22 January, 2026
Gray v Dixon [2026] SAC (Civ) 3
The Sheriff Appeal Court has issued its Opinion in Gray v Dixon [2026] SAC (Civ) 3. Ampersand’s Scott Clair, advocate, appeared for the successful appellant.
The action was one of count, reckoning and payment in which the appellant, who was the son of the deceased, sought an accounting from the respondents, who were both joint attorneys prior to the deceased’s death and executors-nominate under his will. The respondents maintained they had made an accounting, but in any event disputed the nature of their obligation to account.
At first instance, the sheriff had found that only the first respondent owed an obligation to account to the appellant, as the second respondent had in fact made no intromissions. On appeal, the Sheriff Appeal Court held that the obligation was owed also by the second respondent. An obligation to account is owed by every attorney. The only reason to exclude the second respondent from such an obligation would be if the sheriff were correct to conclude that her duty to account only arose upon intromission.
The Sheriff Appeal Court reiterated that a beneficiary should not be required to prove intromissions as a precondition for seeking accountability for those intromissions. The purpose of accountability is to show transparency in dealing. It is not for the beneficiary to prove, but for the attorney to show, what financial transactions have taken place. It is only once that is established that any further rights can be determined. The sheriff had therefore erred in limiting any period of accountability to the period following the first intromissions. The executors-nominate had power to demand an accounting for the period during which the attorneys’ power endured.
The Sheriff Appeal Court therefore quashed the existing interlocutor and of new made an order directed against both respondents qua executors, ordaining them to seek an accounting from both respondents qua attorneys, of their intromissions with the estate of the deceased from the date of their appointment as attorneys to the date of death.
You can find the Sheriff Appeal Court Opinion here.