Purdie v City Of Glasgow Council [2001] ScotCS 302 (21 December 2001)

Purdie v City Of Glasgow Council [2001] ScotCS 302 (21 December 2001)

The pursuer's averments are sufficiently relevant and specific to allow inquiry into whether the manual handling operation presented a foreseeable possibility of injury; proof before answer is justified for both statutory and common law cases.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 302
Parties
Pursuer: Robert Purdie; Defenders: City of Glasgow Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
21 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action / Procedural Ruling on Relevancy and Specification; Proof Before Answer Ordered
Outcome
Proof before answer ordered; both statutory and common law cases to proceed to inquiry
Legal Topics
Manual Handling Operations, Workplace Safety, Employer's Duty of Care, Foreseeability of Injury
Employment Law Health and Safety Law Tort Law Manual Handling Operations Workplace Safety Employer's Duty of Care Foreseeability of Injury

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Purdie

Pursuer

City of Glasgow Council

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action / Procedural Ruling on Relevancy and Specification; Proof Before Answer Ordered

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pursuer's averments disclose a relevant and sufficiently specific risk of injury under Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992
  2. 2 Whether the common law case should be excluded if the statutory case fails

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's averments are sufficiently relevant and specific to allow inquiry into whether the manual handling operation presented a foreseeable possibility of injury; proof before answer is justified for both statutory and common law cases.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer ordered; both statutory and common law cases to proceed to inquiry

Orders

  • Allow proof before answer of whole respective averments on record