Ferguson v Ferguson [2015] ScotCS CSIH_63 (14 August 2015)

Ferguson v Ferguson [2015] ScotCS CSIH_63 (14 August 2015)

The jury was entitled to find contributory negligence based on evidence that the pursuer provoked the dog, and the apportionment of 85% blame to the pursuer was not so unreasonable as to justify interference. The damages award, though modest, did not fall so far below a proper judicial assessment as to constitute a gross injustice or require a new trial.

Citation
[2015] ScotCS CSIH_63
Parties
Pursuer and Reclaimer: Margaret Ferguson; Defender and Respondent: Iain Ferguson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Damages for Dog Bite / Appeal Against Jury Verdict and Motion for New Trial
Outcome
Motion for new trial refused.
Legal Topics
Strict Liability for Animals, Contributory Negligence, Assessment of Damages, Jury Trial Procedure
Tort Law Personal Injury Statutory Liability Strict Liability for Animals Contributory Negligence Assessment of Damages Jury Trial Procedure

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Margaret Ferguson

Pursuer and Reclaimer

Iain Ferguson

Defender and Respondent

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Damages for Dog Bite / Appeal Against Jury Verdict and Motion for New Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the jury's finding of contributory negligence was contrary to the evidence
  2. 2 Whether the jury's award of damages was inadequate

Ratio Decidendi

The jury was entitled to find contributory negligence based on evidence that the pursuer provoked the dog, and the apportionment of 85% blame to the pursuer was not so unreasonable as to justify interference. The damages award, though modest, did not fall so far below a proper judicial assessment as to constitute a gross injustice or require a new trial.

Court Disposition

Motion for new trial refused.

Orders

  • Case continued on all questions of expenses.