Brewster & Ors (t/a The Medical Practice, Stanley) v Tayside Primary Care NHS Trust & Ors For Judicial Review [2001] ScotCS 110 (10 May 2001)

Brewster & Ors (t/a The Medical Practice, Stanley) v Tayside Primary Care NHS Trust & Ors For Judicial Review [2001] ScotCS 110 (10 May 2001)

Adequate reasons were given for discontinuance, and no statutory or contractual right of appeal against discontinuance exists. The balance of convenience does not favour granting interim suspension.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 110
Parties
Petitioner: Doctor J H Brewster, Doctor A R Bulcraig, Doctor Gillian Davidson, Doctor Shona Sinclair (The Medical Practice, Stanley); First Respondent: Tayside Primary Care NHS Trust; Second Respondent: W. Davidson & Sons Ltd.; Third Respondent: The Scottish Ministers
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Interim Orders Motion
Outcome
interim orders refused
Legal Topics
NHS Dispensing Arrangements, Legitimate Expectation, Right to Reasons, Appeal Rights, Balance of Convenience
Health Law Administrative Law Contract Law NHS Dispensing Arrangements Legitimate Expectation Right to Reasons Appeal Rights Balance of Convenience

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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Doctor J H Brewster, Doctor A R Bulcraig, Doctor Gillian Davidson, Doctor Shona Sinclair (The Medical Practice, Stanley)

Petitioner

Tayside Primary Care NHS Trust

First Respondent

W. Davidson & Sons Ltd.

Second Respondent

The Scottish Ministers

Third Respondent

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Interim Orders Motion

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Trust was required to give reasons for discontinuing the dispensing requirement
  2. 2 Whether there was a right of appeal against discontinuance under regulation 34 or paragraph 80 of the Red Book
  3. 3 Whether the balance of convenience favoured granting interim suspension

Ratio Decidendi

Adequate reasons were given for discontinuance, and no statutory or contractual right of appeal against discontinuance exists. The balance of convenience does not favour granting interim suspension.

Court Disposition

interim orders refused

Orders

  • Petitioners found liable in expenses to Trust; expenses to Davidsons awarded at one half; no expenses due to or by Scottish Ministers