Gunn v Bowie Or Newman [2000] ScotCS 327 (19 December 2000)

Gunn v Bowie Or Newman [2000] ScotCS 327 (19 December 2000)

A factor which applies in every or virtually every instance of a listed action (such as the alleged incompatibility of jury trial with Article 6 ECHR in all personal injury actions) cannot constitute 'special cause' under section 9(b) of the Court of Session Act 1988. Therefore, the defender's arguments do not justify remitting the case to proof instead of jury trial, and the statutory scheme requires jury trial in the absence of special cause or consent.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 327
Parties
Pursuer: William John Gunn; Defender: Mrs Anne Gillian Bowie or Newman
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
19 December 2000
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages Action / Interlocutory Decision on Mode of Inquiry (jury Trial Vs. Proof)
Outcome
No order made on defender's plea; defender given time to lodge minute for declaration of incompatibility; case to be put out By Order for further procedure.
Legal Topics
Jury Trial in Personal Injury Actions, Interpretation of 'special Cause' Under Court of Session Act 1988, Compatibility of Scottish Jury Trial Procedure With Article 6 ECHR, Human Rights Act 1998 Impact on Civil Procedure
Civil Procedure Human Rights Personal Injury Jury Trial in Personal Injury Actions Interpretation of 'special Cause' Under Court of Session Act 1988 Compatibility of Scottish Jury Trial Procedure With Article 6 ECHR Human Rights Act 1998 Impact on Civil Procedure

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

Parties

William John Gunn

Pursuer

Mrs Anne Gillian Bowie or Newman

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages Action / Interlocutory Decision on Mode of Inquiry (jury Trial Vs. Proof)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trial by jury in personal injury actions is incompatible with Article 6 ECHR right to a fair hearing
  2. 2 Whether the existence of a disputed solatium claim constitutes 'special cause' under section 9(b) of the Court of Session Act 1988 to allow proof instead of jury trial
  3. 3 Interpretation of 'special cause' in light of the Human Rights Act 1998

Ratio Decidendi

A factor which applies in every or virtually every instance of a listed action (such as the alleged incompatibility of jury trial with Article 6 ECHR in all personal injury actions) cannot constitute 'special cause' under section 9(b) of the Court of Session Act 1988. Therefore, the defender's arguments do not justify remitting the case to proof instead of jury trial, and the statutory scheme requires jury trial in the absence of special cause or consent.

Court Disposition

No order made on defender's plea; defender given time to lodge minute for declaration of incompatibility; case to be put out By Order for further procedure.