Ormsby v Strathclyde Police [2008] ScotCS CSOH_143 (10 October 2008)

Ormsby v Strathclyde Police [2008] ScotCS CSOH_143 (10 October 2008)

A duty of reasonable care was owed to the pursuer and other officers, and it was breached by the decisions taken by the officer in charge given the way in which officers were deployed and continued to be deployed over a lengthy period once the risk of serious injury became apparent. The operational decisions were not consistent with the increased emphasis on health and safety of officers, and the pursuer is entitled to a remedy under civil law.

Citation
[2008] ScotCS CSOH_143
Parties
Pursuer: Tracey Ormsby; Defender: The Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 October 2008
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action / Judgment After Proof
Outcome
Liability established against the defender for negligence.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Health and Safety, Employer Liability, Operational Decisions, Psychiatric Injury
Tort Employment Law Police Law Negligence Duty of Care Health and Safety Employer Liability Operational Decisions +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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tracey Ormsby

Pursuer

The Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action / Judgment After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the senior officer in charge negligent in handling the police operation?
  2. 2 Did the negligence cause the pursuer loss, injury and damage, and to what extent?

Ratio Decidendi

A duty of reasonable care was owed to the pursuer and other officers, and it was breached by the decisions taken by the officer in charge given the way in which officers were deployed and continued to be deployed over a lengthy period once the risk of serious injury became apparent. The operational decisions were not consistent with the increased emphasis on health and safety of officers, and the pursuer is entitled to a remedy under civil law.

Court Disposition

Liability established against the defender for negligence.

Orders

  • Pursuer entitled to damages; quantum to be determined.