McCreery v Letson & Ors [2015] ScotCS CSOH_153 (10 November 2015)

McCreery v Letson & Ors [2015] ScotCS CSOH_153 (10 November 2015)

The first defender failed to take reasonable care by not reducing his speed when approaching a known hazard (bus stop opposite hospital entrance with warning signs), and did not anticipate the foreseeable risk of a pedestrian crossing from behind the bus. The pursuer was also contributorily negligent in crossing the road without ensuring it was safe. Liability is apportioned equally (50-50) between the parties.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSOH_153
Parties
Pursuer: Veronica McCreery; Defenders: Terrence Letson and Others
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident / Proof (trial) on Liability and Contributory Negligence
Outcome
Defenders liable to make reparation to the pursuer, with liability apportioned 50-50 due to contributory negligence.
Legal Topics
Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Duty of Care, Causation, Apportionment of Liability
Tort Law Personal Injury Road Traffic Law Negligence Contributory Negligence Duty of Care Causation Apportionment of Liability

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

Parties

Veronica McCreery

Pursuer

Terrence Letson and Others

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Road Traffic Accident / Proof (trial) on Liability and Contributory Negligence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the first defender was negligent in his driving and failed to take reasonable care for the safety of the pursuer.
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was contributorily negligent in crossing the road as she did.
  3. 3 What is the appropriate apportionment of liability between the parties.

Ratio Decidendi

The first defender failed to take reasonable care by not reducing his speed when approaching a known hazard (bus stop opposite hospital entrance with warning signs), and did not anticipate the foreseeable risk of a pedestrian crossing from behind the bus. The pursuer was also contributorily negligent in crossing the road without ensuring it was safe. Liability is apportioned equally (50-50) between the parties.

Court Disposition

Defenders liable to make reparation to the pursuer, with liability apportioned 50-50 due to contributory negligence.

Orders

  • Defenders to pay damages to the pursuer, reduced by 50% for contributory negligence.
  • Further procedure and expenses reserved; parties to address the court if required.