Thomson (AP) v The Scottish Ministers [2013] ScotCS CSIH_63 (28 June 2013)

Thomson (AP) v The Scottish Ministers [2013] ScotCS CSIH_63 (28 June 2013)

The pursuer failed to plead sufficient proximity or special relationship between the SPS and the deceased to establish a duty of care under common law. The deceased was not shown to be at a distinct and special risk beyond that of the general public. The Article 2 ECHR claim failed as there was no averment of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual known to the authorities at the relevant time.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSIH_63
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Ann Thomson (AP); Defenders and Respondents: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Appeal From Dismissal at First Instance
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; action remains struck out as irrelevant
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Negligence, Liability of Public Authorities, Article 2 ECHR, Proximity, Risk Assessment, Prisoner Release
Tort Law Public Law Human Rights Law Duty of Care Negligence Liability of Public Authorities Article 2 ECHR Proximity +2 more

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 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ann Thomson (AP)

Pursuer and Reclaimer

The Scottish Ministers

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Appeal From Dismissal at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Scottish Prison Service owed a duty of care to the deceased upon the negligent release of a dangerous prisoner
  2. 2 Whether the circumstances satisfied the proximity and foreseeability requirements for a duty of care
  3. 3 Whether Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights was breached by failure to protect the deceased's life

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to plead sufficient proximity or special relationship between the SPS and the deceased to establish a duty of care under common law. The deceased was not shown to be at a distinct and special risk beyond that of the general public. The Article 2 ECHR claim failed as there was no averment of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual known to the authorities at the relevant time.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; action remains struck out as irrelevant

Orders

  • No proof before answer granted
  • Action dismissed as irrelevant