K2 Restaurants Ltd v Glasgow City Council [2013] ScotCS CSIH_49 (08 May 2013)

K2 Restaurants Ltd v Glasgow City Council [2013] ScotCS CSIH_49 (08 May 2013)

Once the Council decided to demolish part of the tenement, it owed a common law duty of care to neighbouring proprietors to ensure the works did not create a new, foreseeable risk of harm. The Council breached this duty by failing to stabilise the exposed wall, despite knowledge of its instability and recommendations from its own officials. The statutory framework did not preclude the existence of this duty in the operational phase, and the Council's failure to act was negligent.

Citation
[2013] ScotCS CSIH_49
Parties
Pursuers and Respondents: K2 Restaurants Limited; Defenders and Reclaimers: Glasgow City Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Appeal From Interlocutor of Temporary Lord Ordinary After Proof
Outcome
Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of Temporary Lord Ordinary affirmed.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Statutory Powers, Liability of Public Authorities, Building Safety, Demolition Works
Tort Law Public Law Local Government Law Negligence Duty of Care Statutory Powers Liability of Public Authorities Building Safety +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

K2 Restaurants Limited

Pursuers and Respondents

Glasgow City Council

Defenders and Reclaimers

Procedural Posture

Reclaiming Motion (appeal) / Appeal From Interlocutor of Temporary Lord Ordinary After Proof

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Glasgow City Council owed a common law duty of care to neighbouring proprietors in the operational execution of statutory demolition works under section 13 of the Building (Scotland) Act 1959.
  2. 2 Whether the Council breached that duty by failing to stabilise an exposed wall, resulting in foreseeable damage.
  3. 3 Whether the statutory framework precluded or limited the existence or scope of a common law duty of care in these circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi

Once the Council decided to demolish part of the tenement, it owed a common law duty of care to neighbouring proprietors to ensure the works did not create a new, foreseeable risk of harm. The Council breached this duty by failing to stabilise the exposed wall, despite knowledge of its instability and recommendations from its own officials. The statutory framework did not preclude the existence of this duty in the operational phase, and the Council's failure to act was negligent.

Court Disposition

Reclaiming motion refused; interlocutor of Temporary Lord Ordinary affirmed.

Orders

  • Decree for agreed sum of damages against Glasgow City Council sustained.