Futter v Bryceland [2000] ScotCS 45 (22 February 2000)

Futter v Bryceland [2000] ScotCS 45 (22 February 2000)

The defender was negligent in driving at a speed of approximately 20 mph or more in snowy conditions and failing to keep a proper lookout for children crossing the road, which caused the accident. The pursuer was also contributorily negligent by running into the road without looking, and his damages should be reduced by 60% as just and equitable apportionment of responsibility.

Citation
[2000] ScotCS 45
Parties
Pursuer: David Alan Futter; Defender: Paula Bryceland
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
22 February 2000
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident / Proof Before Answer on Liability and Contributory Negligence; Quantum to Be Determined Later
Outcome
Liability apportioned; defender found liable subject to 60% reduction for contributory negligence by pursuer; quantum of damages to be determined at later hearing.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Standard of Care, Damages Reduction, Duty of Care
Tort Personal Injury Road Traffic Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Standard of Care Damages Reduction Duty of Care

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

Parties

David Alan Futter

Pursuer

Paula Bryceland

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident / Proof Before Answer on Liability and Contributory Negligence; Quantum to Be Determined Later

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the accident caused by the fault of the defender?
  2. 2 Did the pursuer contribute to the occurrence of the accident by his own fault?
  3. 3 What is the just and equitable apportionment of responsibility under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945?

Ratio Decidendi

The defender was negligent in driving at a speed of approximately 20 mph or more in snowy conditions and failing to keep a proper lookout for children crossing the road, which caused the accident. The pursuer was also contributorily negligent by running into the road without looking, and his damages should be reduced by 60% as just and equitable apportionment of responsibility.

Court Disposition

Liability apportioned; defender found liable subject to 60% reduction for contributory negligence by pursuer; quantum of damages to be determined at later hearing.

Orders

  • Sustain pursuer's first plea-in-law.
  • Repel defender's third and fourth pleas-in-law.