DAVID TOWERS AND OTHERS AGAINST ERLAND THOMAS FLAWS AND STEPHEN CARTWELL PROCTOR [2015] ScotCS CSIH_97 (27 February 2015)

DAVID TOWERS AND OTHERS AGAINST ERLAND THOMAS FLAWS AND STEPHEN CARTWELL PROCTOR [2015] ScotCS CSIH_97 (27 February 2015)

Averments regarding deficiencies in the criminal trial evidence and subsequent reports are irrelevant to the civil proceedings, as the only effect of the conviction is to reverse the onus of proof; there is no special cause to withhold the case from jury trial, and the irrelevant averments should be excluded from probation.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSIH_97
Parties
Pursuers and Reclaimers: David Towers and Others; First Defender and Respondent: Erland Thomas Flaws; Second Defender and Respondent: Stephen Cartwell Proctor
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
27 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury (road Traffic Accident) Reclaiming Motion / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) Against Refusal to Allow Issues for Jury Trial
Outcome
Reclaiming motion allowed; interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary recalled; issues allowed for jury trial; irrelevant averments excluded from probation; record to be amended accordingly.
Legal Topics
Jury Trial—special Cause, Effect of Criminal Conviction in Civil Proceedings, Section 10 Law Reform (miscellaneous Provisions) (scotland) Act 1968, Onus of Proof Reversal, Admissibility of Evidence
Civil Procedure Personal Injury Evidence Jury Trial—special Cause Effect of Criminal Conviction in Civil Proceedings Section 10 Law Reform (miscellaneous Provisions) (scotland) Act 1968 Onus of Proof Reversal Admissibility of Evidence

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

Parties

David Towers and Others

Pursuers and Reclaimers

Erland Thomas Flaws

First Defender and Respondent

Stephen Cartwell Proctor

Second Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury (road Traffic Accident) Reclaiming Motion / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) Against Refusal to Allow Issues for Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether special cause exists to withhold a personal injuries road traffic action from jury trial due to the existence of a criminal conviction and related averments
  2. 2 Whether averments regarding deficiencies in the criminal trial evidence are relevant in the civil proceedings
  3. 3 Proper application of section 10 of the Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) (Scotland) Act 1968

Ratio Decidendi

Averments regarding deficiencies in the criminal trial evidence and subsequent reports are irrelevant to the civil proceedings, as the only effect of the conviction is to reverse the onus of proof; there is no special cause to withhold the case from jury trial, and the irrelevant averments should be excluded from probation.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion allowed; interlocutors of the Lord Ordinary recalled; issues allowed for jury trial; irrelevant averments excluded from probation; record to be amended accordingly.

Orders

  • Allow the record to be amended by deleting specified averments regarding sentencing and reports.
  • Exclude from probation the first defender's and second defender's averments regarding deficiencies in the criminal trial evidence, sentencing, and previous convictions.