Harte v. Dalkeith Demolitions Ltd [2004] ScotCS 87 (02 April 2004)

Harte v. Dalkeith Demolitions Ltd [2004] ScotCS 87 (02 April 2004)

The pursuer's pleadings, while open to criticism and reliant on inferences, are not necessarily irrelevant and are sufficient to proceed to inquiry. However, due to doubtful relevancy and practical difficulties in directing a jury on the basis of the pleadings, special cause exists to withhold the case from jury trial. The appropriate course is to allow a proof before answer.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 87
Parties
Pursuer: Anne Harte; Defender: Dalkeith Demolitions Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Civil Damages for Fatal Accident (employer's Liability) / Procedure Roll Hearing on Relevancy and Specification; Motion to Allow Issues (jury Trial)
Outcome
Pursuer's motion to allow issues (jury trial) refused; proof before answer allowed.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Negligence, Workplace Safety, Risk Assessment, Statutory Duties, Contributory Negligence, Loss of Support, Loss of Services
Tort Employment Law Health and Safety Employer's Liability Negligence Workplace Safety Risk Assessment Statutory Duties +3 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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anne Harte

Pursuer

Dalkeith Demolitions Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Damages for Fatal Accident (employer's Liability) / Procedure Roll Hearing on Relevancy and Specification; Motion to Allow Issues (jury Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's pleadings are relevant and sufficiently specific to proceed to inquiry or jury trial
  2. 2 Whether the defenders owed a duty of care to the deceased in the circumstances
  3. 3 Whether foreseeability of the deceased's actions was adequately averred

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's pleadings, while open to criticism and reliant on inferences, are not necessarily irrelevant and are sufficient to proceed to inquiry. However, due to doubtful relevancy and practical difficulties in directing a jury on the basis of the pleadings, special cause exists to withhold the case from jury trial. The appropriate course is to allow a proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Pursuer's motion to allow issues (jury trial) refused; proof before answer allowed.

Orders

  • Refuse pursuer's motion to allow issues (jury trial)
  • Reserve defenders' first plea-in-law