Marinello v. City Of Edinburgh Council [2011] ScotCS CSIH_33 (18 May 2011)

Marinello v. City Of Edinburgh Council [2011] ScotCS CSIH_33 (18 May 2011)

The court held that it could not be said on the pleadings that the pursuer was bound to fail in establishing that the 2007 incident was part of a course of conduct commencing in 2004–2005, and thus the action should not be dismissed without inquiry into the facts.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSIH_33
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Frederick Marinello; Defenders and Respondents: The City of Edinburgh Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
18 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal After Procedure Roll Hearing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; proof before answer allowed.
Legal Topics
Harassment, Limitation of Actions, Employer's Liability, Protection From Harassment Act 1997
Employment Law Civil Procedure Tort/delict Harassment Limitation of Actions Employer's Liability Protection From Harassment Act 1997

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frederick Marinello

Pursuer and Reclaimer

The City of Edinburgh Council

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Dismissal After Procedure Roll Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the alleged incident in March 2007 could form part of a course of conduct amounting to harassment under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  2. 2 Whether the action was time-barred under section 18B of the Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it could not be said on the pleadings that the pursuer was bound to fail in establishing that the 2007 incident was part of a course of conduct commencing in 2004–2005, and thus the action should not be dismissed without inquiry into the facts.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled; proof before answer allowed.

Orders

  • Recall of the Lord Ordinary's interlocutor dated 2 March 2010
  • Allow proof before answer, leaving all pleas standing