Davis v Catto [2011] ScotCS CSIH_85 (16 December 2011)

Davis v Catto [2011] ScotCS CSIH_85 (16 December 2011)

The evidence did not establish that the third party's excessive speed or failure to slow down during overtaking had any causal role in the accident. There was no evidence of racing or encouragement. The accident was caused by the first defender's manoeuvre and under-inflated tyre. The third party is not jointly liable to contribute to damages.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSIH_85
Parties
Pursuer: Rachel Davis; Defender & Respondent: John Catto; Defender & Respondent: CIS General Insurance Limited; Third Party & Reclaimer: Stephen Skinner
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Reparation for Personal Injuries (road Traffic Accident) / Reclaiming Motion (appeal)
Outcome
Reclaiming motion allowed; cross appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Contribution Between Tortfeasors, Duty of Care, Causation, Road Traffic Accidents
Tort Personal Injury Insurance Law Contribution Between Tortfeasors Duty of Care Causation Road Traffic Accidents

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rachel Davis

Pursuer

John Catto

Defender & Respondent

CIS General Insurance Limited

Defender & Respondent

Stephen Skinner

Third Party & Reclaimer

Procedural Posture

Reparation for Personal Injuries (road Traffic Accident) / Reclaiming Motion (appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the third party was jointly liable to contribute to damages for the accident
  2. 2 Whether participation in 'racing' or excessive speed establishes joint liability
  3. 3 Whether the third party breached a duty of care by failing to slow down during overtaking

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence did not establish that the third party's excessive speed or failure to slow down during overtaking had any causal role in the accident. There was no evidence of racing or encouragement. The accident was caused by the first defender's manoeuvre and under-inflated tyre. The third party is not jointly liable to contribute to damages.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion allowed; cross appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Third party not liable to contribute to damages or expenses payable by defenders to pursuer