Robertson & Anor v Smith [1999] ScotCS 111 (12 May 1999)

Robertson & Anor v Smith [1999] ScotCS 111 (12 May 1999)

The second pursuer's case was dismissed as irrelevant due to failure to aver the duty of care and its breach. The first pursuer's claim for loss of earnings and pension was not too complex for jury trial, and issues were allowed for jury determination.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 111
Parties
Pursuer: Brian Murray Robertson; Pursuer: Another (father of Brian Murray Robertson); Defender: Kevin Smith
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
12 May 1999
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages Action / Procedure Roll (preliminary Hearing on Relevancy and Suitability for Jury Trial)
Outcome
Second pursuer's case dismissed as irrelevant; first pursuer's case allowed to proceed to jury trial.
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Secondary Victim Claims, Loss of Earnings, Jury Trial Suitability
Tort Personal Injury Duty of Care Secondary Victim Claims Loss of Earnings Jury Trial Suitability

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Murray Robertson

Pursuer

Another (father of Brian Murray Robertson)

Pursuer

Kevin Smith

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages Action / Procedure Roll (preliminary Hearing on Relevancy and Suitability for Jury Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the second pursuer's pleadings disclose a relevant case for damages as a secondary victim
  2. 2 Whether the first pursuer's claim for future loss of earnings and pension is too complex for jury trial

Ratio Decidendi

The second pursuer's case was dismissed as irrelevant due to failure to aver the duty of care and its breach. The first pursuer's claim for loss of earnings and pension was not too complex for jury trial, and issues were allowed for jury determination.

Court Disposition

Second pursuer's case dismissed as irrelevant; first pursuer's case allowed to proceed to jury trial.

Orders

  • Dismissal of second pursuer's claim
  • Issues allowed for jury trial in respect of first pursuer