DARREN CONQUER AGAINST LOTHIAN HEALTH BOARD [2014] ScotCS CSOH_132 (26 August 2014)

DARREN CONQUER AGAINST LOTHIAN HEALTH BOARD [2014] ScotCS CSOH_132 (26 August 2014)

The pleadings, if proved, disclose a relevant case that the defenders' employees were negligent in failing to carry out requested diagnostic scans, and the defenders have not demonstrated that the case must necessarily fail. The matter should proceed to proof before answer.

Citation
[2014] ScotCS CSOH_132
Parties
Pursuer: Darren Conquer; Defender: Lothian Health Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
26 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil Medical Negligence / Procedure Roll Hearing on Relevancy and Specification of Pleadings; Decision on Whether to Allow Proof Before Answer
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed on the relevant ground of fault; case to proceed to further procedure.
Legal Topics
Hospital Liability, Vicarious Liability, Standard of Care, Professional Negligence, Pleadings Relevancy and Specification
Medical Negligence Tort Law Hospital Liability Vicarious Liability Standard of Care Professional Negligence Pleadings Relevancy and Specification

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Darren Conquer

Pursuer

Lothian Health Board

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Medical Negligence / Procedure Roll Hearing on Relevancy and Specification of Pleadings; Decision on Whether to Allow Proof Before Answer

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pleadings disclose a relevant and sufficiently specified case of negligence against the defenders for failure to carry out requested diagnostic scans
  2. 2 Whether the case should be dismissed or allowed to proceed to proof before answer

Ratio Decidendi

The pleadings, if proved, disclose a relevant case that the defenders' employees were negligent in failing to carry out requested diagnostic scans, and the defenders have not demonstrated that the case must necessarily fail. The matter should proceed to proof before answer.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed on the relevant ground of fault; case to proceed to further procedure.

Orders

  • Allow proof before answer on the ground of failure to carry out requested scans
  • Case put out by order to discuss further procedure