Wallace v Glasgow City Council [2010] ScotCS CSOH_88 (08 July 2010)

Wallace v Glasgow City Council [2010] ScotCS CSOH_88 (08 July 2010)

The defenders were not in breach of statutory duty because it was not 'likely' that staff would open the window by standing on the toilet, safe alternatives existed, and there was no evidence of actual knowledge by the defenders of the unsafe practice. No causal link was established between any alleged breach and the injury.

Citation
[2010] ScotCS CSOH_88
Parties
Pursuer: Marie Ann Wallace; Defender: Glasgow City Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
08 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action / Judgment After Proof (trial)
Outcome
Decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the defenders; pursuer's claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Statutory Duty of Employer, Workplace (health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, Workplace Accident, Contributory Negligence
Employment Law Personal Injury Health and Safety Statutory Duty of Employer Workplace (health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999 Workplace Accident Contributory Negligence

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marie Ann Wallace

Pursuer

Glasgow City Council

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action / Judgment After Proof (trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders breached statutory duties under the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 and the Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999
  2. 2 Whether the accident was caused by any breach of statutory duty by the defenders
  3. 3 Whether the pursuer was contributorily negligent

Ratio Decidendi

The defenders were not in breach of statutory duty because it was not 'likely' that staff would open the window by standing on the toilet, safe alternatives existed, and there was no evidence of actual knowledge by the defenders of the unsafe practice. No causal link was established between any alleged breach and the injury.

Court Disposition

Decree of absolvitor granted in favour of the defenders; pursuer's claim dismissed.

Orders

  • Decree of absolvitor granted.