Cummings v. Darngavil Coal Co. [1903] ScotLR 40_389 (24 February 1903)

Cummings v. Darngavil Coal Co. [1903] ScotLR 40_389 (24 February 1903)

The defenders owed no duty to fence or otherwise protect the wheel to prevent injury to children who, though known to play on the ground, were not invitees or lawfully present. Mere knowledge or acquiescence in their presence did not impose liability. The pursuer's averments did not disclose a relevant case in law.

Citation
[1903] ScotLR 40_389
Parties
Pursuer: Matthew Cummings; Defender: Darngavil Coal Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
24 February 1903
Procedural Posture
Reparation (damages) / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary
Outcome
Action dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty to Public, Liability for Injury to Children, Unfenced Machinery, Trespassers' Rights
Tort Law Occupiers' Liability Duty to Public Liability for Injury to Children Unfenced Machinery Trespassers' Rights

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Matthew Cummings

Pursuer

Darngavil Coal Company, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (damages) / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Lord Ordinary

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders owed a duty of care to protect children playing on their unfenced machinery situated on waste ground near a public road
  2. 2 Whether knowledge and acquiescence of children playing on the ground imposed liability on the defenders for injuries sustained

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders owed no duty to fence or otherwise protect the wheel to prevent injury to children who, though known to play on the ground, were not invitees or lawfully present. Mere knowledge or acquiescence in their presence did not impose liability. The pursuer's averments did not disclose a relevant case in law.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed

Orders

  • Interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled
  • First plea-in-law for defenders sustained