Wood v Lothian and Borders Fire Board [2004] ScotCS 218 (28 September 2004)

Wood v Lothian and Borders Fire Board [2004] ScotCS 218 (28 September 2004)

The court did not accept the pursuer's account of the accident, finding the defenders' witnesses more credible. Even if the accident had occurred as alleged, the object was not a hazard if the BA shuffle was performed properly, and it was not reasonably practicable to remove all items from the room in a realistic training exercise. Therefore, no breach of duty was established.

Citation
[2004] ScotCS 218
Parties
Pursuer: David Wood; Defenders: Lothian and Borders Fire Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Proof (trial on Liability)
Outcome
Action dismissed; decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Workplace Safety, Training Exercise Injury, Workplace (health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992
Employment Law Personal Injury Employer's Liability Workplace Safety Training Exercise Injury Workplace (health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992

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

Parties

David Wood

Pursuer

Lothian and Borders Fire Board

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Proof (trial on Liability)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer sustained injury in the course of employment as alleged
  2. 2 Whether the defenders breached common law or statutory duties of care

Ratio Decidendi

The court did not accept the pursuer's account of the accident, finding the defenders' witnesses more credible. Even if the accident had occurred as alleged, the object was not a hazard if the BA shuffle was performed properly, and it was not reasonably practicable to remove all items from the room in a realistic training exercise. Therefore, no breach of duty was established.

Court Disposition

Action dismissed; decree of absolvitor granted in favour of defenders.

Orders

  • Pleas-in-law for the pursuer repelled.
  • Second and third pleas-in-law for the defenders sustained.