Ramage (Assisted Person) v Scottish African Safari Park Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSOH_68 (08 May 2008)

Ramage (Assisted Person) v Scottish African Safari Park Ltd [2008] ScotCS CSOH_68 (08 May 2008)

The pursuer's pleadings lack sufficient specification and detail to provide fair notice to the defenders, particularly regarding the source of E. coli 0157, the factual basis for foreseeability, the statutory duties relied upon, and the quantification of future medical costs. The lack of specification would prejudice the defenders' ability to prepare for a jury trial and would make it impossible to ensure appropriate jury directions. Accordingly, the case is not suitable for jury trial and the motion for allowance of issues is refused.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_68
Parties
Pursuer: Kerry Ramage as Legal Representative of her child Beth Ramage (Assisted Person); Defenders: Scottish African Safari Park Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 May 2008
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action (damages for Personal Injuries) / Motion for Allowance of Issues (jury Trial)
Outcome
Motion for allowance of issues (jury trial) refused
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability to Non Employees, Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1999, Common Law Negligence, Jury Trial Suitability, Specification of Pleadings
Personal Injury Health and Safety Tort/delict Employer's Liability to Non Employees Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1999 Common Law Negligence Jury Trial Suitability Specification 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerry Ramage as Legal Representative of her child Beth Ramage (Assisted Person)

Pursuer

Scottish African Safari Park Limited

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action (damages for Personal Injuries) / Motion for Allowance of Issues (jury Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's pleadings are sufficiently specified to allow the case to proceed to jury trial
  2. 2 Whether the case is suitable for jury trial given the complexity and lack of specification
  3. 3 Whether the statutory and common law cases are relevantly pled

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's pleadings lack sufficient specification and detail to provide fair notice to the defenders, particularly regarding the source of E. coli 0157, the factual basis for foreseeability, the statutory duties relied upon, and the quantification of future medical costs. The lack of specification would prejudice the defenders' ability to prepare for a jury trial and would make it impossible to ensure appropriate jury directions. Accordingly, the case is not suitable for jury trial and the motion for allowance of issues is refused.

Court Disposition

Motion for allowance of issues (jury trial) refused

Orders

  • Refusal of motion for allowance of issues; case not allowed to proceed to jury trial