Telfer & Ors v. Kellock [2004] ScotCS 245 (10 November 2004)
The statutory language of the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976, specifically Schedule 1, paragraph 1(aa), does not extend to same-sex cohabitants, as the words 'husband or wife' are gender-specific and Parliament did not intend to include same-sex partners. However, the term 'family' in paragraph 1(c) is sufficiently broad to include a child accepted by the deceased as a child of her family, regardless of the sexual orientation or relationship status of the adults in the household.
- Citation
- [2004] ScotCS 245
- Parties
- Pursuers: Jack Telfer and Others; Defender: Alan Shields Kellock
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 10 November 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Damages Claim Under Damages (scotland) Act 1976 / Preliminary Issues on Relevancy (statutory Interpretation)
- Outcome
- Third pursuer's claim dismissed; fourth pursuer's claim allowed to proceed to proof before answer.
- Legal Topics
- Damages for Wrongful Death, Definition of 'relative' Under Damages (scotland) Act 1976, Same Sex Cohabitation and Statutory Rights, Children Accepted as Family, Retrospective Effect of Human Rights Act 1998
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jack Telfer and Others
Pursuers
Alan Shields Kellock
Defender
Procedural Posture
Civil Damages Claim Under Damages (scotland) Act 1976 / Preliminary Issues on Relevancy (statutory Interpretation)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether a same-sex cohabitant qualifies as a 'relative' under Schedule 1 of the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976 for the purposes of claiming damages for wrongful death
- 2 Whether a child accepted by the deceased as a child of her family qualifies as a 'relative' under the same Act
Ratio Decidendi
The statutory language of the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976, specifically Schedule 1, paragraph 1(aa), does not extend to same-sex cohabitants, as the words 'husband or wife' are gender-specific and Parliament did not intend to include same-sex partners. However, the term 'family' in paragraph 1(c) is sufficiently broad to include a child accepted by the deceased as a child of her family, regardless of the sexual orientation or relationship status of the adults in the household.
Court Disposition
Third pursuer's claim dismissed; fourth pursuer's claim allowed to proceed to proof before answer.
Orders
- Sustain defender's first plea in law as it relates to the third pursuer and dismiss her action.
- Repel defender's first plea in law as it relates to the fourth pursuer and allow proof before answer.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment