Appeal in the cause DS against NHS Grampian (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 21 (16 July 2025)

Appeal in the cause DS against NHS Grampian (Sheriff Appeal Court Civil) [2025] SACCIV 21 (16 July 2025)

Appellant failed to establish that Dr Robb's omission constituted negligence under Hunter v Hanley, as respondent's expert evidence was respectable and logically held; appellant also failed to prove causation between alleged negligence and claimed losses, lacking qualified expert evidence; procedural decisions by sheriff were within discretion and not erroneous.

Citation
[2025] SACCIV 21
Parties
Pursuer, Appellant and Cross Respondent: DS; Defender, Respondent and Cross Appellant: NHS Grampian
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 July 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Sheriff Appeal Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal refused, cross-appeal allowed, decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defender.
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Standard of Care, Expert Evidence, Causation, Burden of Proof, Procedural Discretion
Medical Negligence Tort Civil Procedure Duty of Care Standard of Care Expert Evidence Causation Burden of Proof +1 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 6 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DS

Pursuer, Appellant and Cross Respondent

NHS Grampian

Defender, Respondent and Cross Appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Sheriff Appeal Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether consultant neuroradiologist breached duty of care in failing to report pineal cyst
  2. 2 Whether breach caused loss or injury to appellant
  3. 3 Whether appellant established causal link between alleged negligence and claimed losses

Ratio Decidendi

Appellant failed to establish that Dr Robb's omission constituted negligence under Hunter v Hanley, as respondent's expert evidence was respectable and logically held; appellant also failed to prove causation between alleged negligence and claimed losses, lacking qualified expert evidence; procedural decisions by sheriff were within discretion and not erroneous.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused, cross-appeal allowed, decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defender.

Orders

  • Sheriff's interlocutors recalled
  • Findings in fact and law deleted and replaced