Clark (AP) v Greater Glasgow Health Board [2017] ScotCS CSIH_17 (21 February 2017)

Clark (AP) v Greater Glasgow Health Board [2017] ScotCS CSIH_17 (21 February 2017)

The pursuer, having failed to reclaim the interlocutor refusing receipt of the Minute of Amendment within the permitted time, acquiesced in its finality. Even if reviewable, the Lord Ordinary exercised his discretion correctly in refusing the amendment, given its lateness, the radical change of case, potential prejudice to defenders, and lack of adequate explanation or specification. The interests of justice and finality outweigh the pursuer's arguments.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSIH_17
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Jill Clark (A.P.); Defenders and Respondents: Greater Glasgow Health Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) in Personal Injury Action / Appeal Against Refusal to Allow Amendment After Proof But Before Judgment
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary refusing amendment and granting absolvitor affirmed.
Legal Topics
Amendment of Pleadings, Limitation and Prescription, Risk Disclosure in Medical Law, Finality of Judgments, Discretion in Procedural Rulings
Medical Negligence Civil Procedure Personal Injury Amendment of Pleadings Limitation and Prescription Risk Disclosure in Medical Law Finality of Judgments Discretion in Procedural Rulings

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 36 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jill Clark (A.P.)

Pursuer and Reclaimer

Greater Glasgow Health Board

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) in Personal Injury Action / Appeal Against Refusal to Allow Amendment After Proof But Before Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should allow review of an earlier interlocutor refusing receipt of a Minute of Amendment after proof but before judgment
  2. 2 Whether the Lord Ordinary erred in refusing to allow amendment to introduce a new case based on risk disclosure and failure to advise of alternative birth options

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer, having failed to reclaim the interlocutor refusing receipt of the Minute of Amendment within the permitted time, acquiesced in its finality. Even if reviewable, the Lord Ordinary exercised his discretion correctly in refusing the amendment, given its lateness, the radical change of case, potential prejudice to defenders, and lack of adequate explanation or specification. The interests of justice and finality outweigh the pursuer's arguments.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of the Lord Ordinary refusing amendment and granting absolvitor affirmed.

Orders

  • Refusal to allow receipt of Minute of Amendment stands.
  • Decree of absolvitor in favour of defenders remains in force.