DOW RECLAIMING MOTION BY AGAINST AMEC GROUP LIMITED [2017] ScotCS CSIH_75 (28 November 2017)

DOW RECLAIMING MOTION BY AGAINST AMEC GROUP LIMITED [2017] ScotCS CSIH_75 (28 November 2017)

The statutory duties under section 53 of the Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 and Regulation 40 of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 do not extend to liability for pure psychiatric injury absent physical injury unless such harm is within the scope and foreseeability of the statute. The defender provided more than one means of egress and complied with fire safety measures; no breach of statutory duty was established, and the psychiatric injury suffered by the pursuer was not compensable under the statutory provisions.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSIH_75
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Melville Dow; Defenders and Respondents: AMEC Group Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
28 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Inner House, Court of Session, Post Proof, Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Fire Safety in Workplace, Psychiatric Injury, Construction Site Safety, Statutory Interpretation, Duty of Care
Personal Injury Employment Law Statutory Duty Health and Safety Fire Safety in Workplace Psychiatric Injury Construction Site Safety Statutory Interpretation +1 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Melville Dow

Pursuer and Reclaimer

AMEC Group Limited

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Inner House, Court of Session, Post Proof, Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 53 of the Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 and Regulation 40 of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 impose liability for pure psychiatric injury absent physical injury?
  2. 2 Did the defender breach statutory duties regarding fire safety and emergency egress?
  3. 3 Was the risk of fire and psychiatric injury foreseeable and preventable under statutory obligations?

Ratio Decidendi

The statutory duties under section 53 of the Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 and Regulation 40 of the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2007 do not extend to liability for pure psychiatric injury absent physical injury unless such harm is within the scope and foreseeability of the statute. The defender provided more than one means of egress and complied with fire safety measures; no breach of statutory duty was established, and the psychiatric injury suffered by the pursuer was not compensable under the statutory provisions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; cross-appeal allowed

Orders

  • Defender assoilzied (absolved) from liability
  • No damages awarded to pursuer