Grant v Fife Council & Anor [2013] ScotCS CSOH_11 (18 January 2013)

Grant v Fife Council & Anor [2013] ScotCS CSOH_11 (18 January 2013)

The pleadings, taken at their highest, disclose an arguable basis of liability at common law and under the relevant statutory regulations. The case is sufficiently relevant to proceed to proof, as it cannot be determined on paper that there is no basis for liability.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSOH_11
Parties
Pursuer: Stuart Grant; First Defender: Fife Council; Second Defender: The Advocate General for Scotland on behalf of The Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action for Damages / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy of Pleadings
Outcome
Case allowed to proceed to proof.
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Duty of Care, Work at Height Regulations 2005, Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, Occupier's Liability (scotland) Act 1960
Personal Injury Employment Law Health and Safety Law Employer's Liability Duty of Care Work at Height Regulations 2005 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 Occupier's Liability (scotland) Act 1960

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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stuart Grant

Pursuer

Fife Council

First Defender

The Advocate General for Scotland on behalf of The Ministry of Defence

Second Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action for Damages / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's accident during a team-building exercise was within the course of employment
  2. 2 Whether the first defenders owed a duty of care at common law and under statutory regulations
  3. 3 Whether the pleadings disclose a relevant case for proof against the first defenders

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings, taken at their highest, disclose an arguable basis of liability at common law and under the relevant statutory regulations. The case is sufficiently relevant to proceed to proof, as it cannot be determined on paper that there is no basis for liability.

Court Disposition

Case allowed to proceed to proof.

Orders

  • Proof allowed on the whole case as pled.
  • Expenses of the Procedure Roll debate reserved.