Reynolds v North Lanarkshire Council [2011] ScotCS CSOH_211 (09 December 2011)

Reynolds v North Lanarkshire Council [2011] ScotCS CSOH_211 (09 December 2011)

The court held that the media concludendi in both actions was identical, as both were claims for damages for psychological injury allegedly sustained as a result of the defender's actions or omissions during the pursuer's employment. The additional averments in the second action were within the pursuer's knowledge at the time of the first action and could have been pled then. Therefore, all requirements for res judicata were satisfied, and the plea was upheld.

Citation
[2011] ScotCS CSOH_211
Parties
Pursuer: Mary Reynolds; Defender: North Lanarkshire Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
09 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action / Procedure Roll Discussion on Plea of Res Judicata
Outcome
Defender's plea of res judicata upheld; decree of absolvitor pronounced.
Legal Topics
Res Judicata, Negligence, Breach of Statutory Duty, Psychological Injury, Employer's Duty of Care
Civil Procedure Employment Law Personal Injury Res Judicata Negligence Breach of Statutory Duty Psychological Injury Employer's 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Reynolds

Pursuer

North Lanarkshire Council

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action / Procedure Roll Discussion on Plea of Res Judicata

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plea of res judicata applies to bar the pursuer's second action for damages for personal injury against the same defender based on the same or similar facts as a previous action in which decree of absolvitor was granted.

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the media concludendi in both actions was identical, as both were claims for damages for psychological injury allegedly sustained as a result of the defender's actions or omissions during the pursuer's employment. The additional averments in the second action were within the pursuer's knowledge at the time of the first action and could have been pled then. Therefore, all requirements for res judicata were satisfied, and the plea was upheld.

Court Disposition

Defender's plea of res judicata upheld; decree of absolvitor pronounced.

Orders

  • Decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the defender.