Murray (ap) v. Weldex International Offshore Limited & Anor [2002] ScotCS 52 (22nd February, 2002)

Murray (ap) v. Weldex International Offshore Limited & Anor [2002] ScotCS 52 (22nd February, 2002)

The pursuer did not give any conventional or intended signal to the crane operator to lift; the operator negligently proceeded to lift without a clear signal and without ensuring the pursuer was clear of the load, breaching the duty of care. There was no contributory negligence by the pursuer. The defenders are liable in damages for the pursuer's injuries and losses.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 52
Parties
Pursuer: John Murray; First Defender: Weldex International Offshore Limited; Second Defender: Barr Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury/delictual Action / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Decree for the pursuer against the second defenders; first defenders assoilzied (absolved).
Legal Topics
Negligence, Employer's Liability, Workplace Safety, Contributory Negligence, Damages Assessment
Personal Injury Delict (tort) Employment Law Health and Safety Negligence Employer's Liability Workplace Safety Contributory Negligence +1 more

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Murray

Pursuer

Weldex International Offshore Limited

First Defender

Barr Limited

Second Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury/delictual Action / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer gave a signal to the crane operator to lift the load
  2. 2 Whether the crane operator was negligent in operating the crane
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer was contributorily negligent

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer did not give any conventional or intended signal to the crane operator to lift; the operator negligently proceeded to lift without a clear signal and without ensuring the pursuer was clear of the load, breaching the duty of care. There was no contributory negligence by the pursuer. The defenders are liable in damages for the pursuer's injuries and losses.

Court Disposition

Decree for the pursuer against the second defenders; first defenders assoilzied (absolved).

Orders

  • Second defenders to pay the pursuer £175,000 with interest at the judicial rate from the date of decree, comprising agreed solatium (£22,500), agreed past wage loss (£65,000), future loss of earnings (£80,000), Section 8 services (£4,000 to Mrs Murray), and Section 9 services (£3,500).
  • First defenders assoilzied from the conclusions of the action.