Stephen v. Peter & Ors [2005] ScotCS CSOH_38 (16 March 2005)

Stephen v. Peter & Ors [2005] ScotCS CSOH_38 (16 March 2005)

The first defender was in breach of statutory duty by providing a lorry with a wrongly calibrated tachograph and speed limiter, which was a contributing cause of the accident. However, the pursuer's own excessive speed was the predominant cause. The breach did not amount to a novus actus interveniens, but contributory negligence was assessed at 90% to the pursuer and 10% to the first defender.

Citation
[2005] ScotCS CSOH_38
Parties
Pursuer: Leith Stephen; First Defender: Robert Peter; Second Defenders: Second Defenders (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action (damages for Road Traffic Accident) / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Liability apportioned: 90% to pursuer (contributory negligence), 10% to first defender (breach of statutory duty). Decree of absolvitor for second defenders. Damages to be assessed per joint minute on 10% liability.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Defective Equipment, Contributory Negligence, Statutory Duty, Causation, Personal Injury, Road Traffic Accident
Tort/delict Employment Law Health and Safety Employer's Liability Defective Equipment Contributory Negligence Statutory Duty Causation +2 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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Leith Stephen

Pursuer

Robert Peter

First Defender

Second Defenders (unnamed)

Second Defenders

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action (damages for Road Traffic Accident) / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer (first defender) is liable under the Employer's Liability (Defective Equipment) Act 1969 and the Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992 for injuries caused by a wrongly calibrated tachograph and speed limiter.
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's own negligence or recklessness breaks the chain of causation or constitutes contributory negligence.

Ratio Decidendi

The first defender was in breach of statutory duty by providing a lorry with a wrongly calibrated tachograph and speed limiter, which was a contributing cause of the accident. However, the pursuer's own excessive speed was the predominant cause. The breach did not amount to a novus actus interveniens, but contributory negligence was assessed at 90% to the pursuer and 10% to the first defender.

Court Disposition

Liability apportioned: 90% to pursuer (contributory negligence), 10% to first defender (breach of statutory duty). Decree of absolvitor for second defenders. Damages to be assessed per joint minute on 10% liability.

Orders

  • Sustain first plea-in-law for pursuer against first defender (breach of statutory duty)
  • Repel defenders' pleas-in-law except as to contributory negligence