Ledger v MacGregor Energy Services Ltd & Ors [2000] ScotCS 268 (27 October 2000)

Ledger v MacGregor Energy Services Ltd & Ors [2000] ScotCS 268 (27 October 2000)

The employer's core duty to take reasonable care for the employee's safety is not negated by the employee being sent to work under the direction of others; the sheriff erred in dismissing the claim against the employer and excluding Regulation 5(1) averments without factual enquiry; a proof before answer is required on the pleadings as a whole.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 268
Parties
Pursuer and Appellant: Steven Ledger; First Defender and Respondent: MacGregor Energy Services Limited; Second Defenders and Respondents: Second Defenders; Third Defenders and Respondents: Third Defenders
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal Against Interlocutor Dismissing Claims and Excluding Averments; Seeking Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sheriff's interlocutor recalled; proof before answer allowed on all pleadings.
Legal Topics
Employer's Duty of Care, Non Delegable Duty, Safe System of Work, Offshore Safety Regulations, Relevancy of Pleadings
Employment Law Personal Injury Health and Safety Employer's Duty of Care Non Delegable Duty Safe System of Work Offshore Safety Regulations Relevancy of Pleadings

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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Ledger

Pursuer and Appellant

MacGregor Energy Services Limited

First Defender and Respondent

Second Defenders

Second Defenders and Respondents

Third Defenders

Third Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal Against Interlocutor Dismissing Claims and Excluding Averments; Seeking Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer's duty of care is non-delegable when employee is hired out to work under direction of others
  2. 2 Whether the sheriff erred in dismissing the case against the employer without factual enquiry
  3. 3 Whether averments regarding breach of Regulation 5(1) of the Offshore Installations (Operational Safety, Health and Welfare) Regulations 1976 should be excluded from proof

Ratio Decidendi

The employer's core duty to take reasonable care for the employee's safety is not negated by the employee being sent to work under the direction of others; the sheriff erred in dismissing the claim against the employer and excluding Regulation 5(1) averments without factual enquiry; a proof before answer is required on the pleadings as a whole.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sheriff's interlocutor recalled; proof before answer allowed on all pleadings.

Orders

  • Recall the interlocutor of the sheriff dated 28 July 1998.
  • Allow a proof before answer on the pleadings as a whole.