Note: Dr Laurence McDermid against NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Health Board (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCDUMB 4 (23 December 2025)

Note: Dr Laurence McDermid against NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Health Board (Sheriff Court Civil) [2026] SCDUMB 4 (23 December 2025)

The motion was refused as premature because the court had not yet heard answers or established the factual dispute, making it inappropriate to order inspection of documents or exercise discretion under section 180A at this stage. The request for written reasons was denied as the summary application procedure does not mandate written reasons at interlocutory stages, and the application of OCR 12.2(5) is discretionary and not obligatory in summary applications.

Citation
[2026] SCDUMB 4
Parties
Pursuer: Dr Laurence McDermid; Defender: NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Health Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 December 2025
Procedural Posture
Summary Application / Interlocutory Motion Prior to First Hearing After Remittal
Outcome
Motion refused; expenses of the motion awarded against Dr McDermid.
Legal Topics
Subject Access Requests, Compliance Orders, Written Reasons, Summary Application Procedure
Data Protection Civil Procedure Subject Access Requests Compliance Orders Written Reasons Summary Application 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dr Laurence McDermid

Pursuer

NHS Greater Glasgow & Clyde Health Board

Defender

Procedural Posture

Summary Application / Interlocutory Motion Prior to First Hearing After Remittal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court should exercise powers under section 180A of the Data Protection Act 2018 to require inspection of information prior to first hearing
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer is entitled to written reasons for refusal of the motion under Ordinary Cause Rule 12.2(5)

Ratio Decidendi

The motion was refused as premature because the court had not yet heard answers or established the factual dispute, making it inappropriate to order inspection of documents or exercise discretion under section 180A at this stage. The request for written reasons was denied as the summary application procedure does not mandate written reasons at interlocutory stages, and the application of OCR 12.2(5) is discretionary and not obligatory in summary applications.

Court Disposition

Motion refused; expenses of the motion awarded against Dr McDermid.

Orders

  • Motion under section 180A Data Protection Act 2018 refused in hoc statu.
  • Expenses of the motion awarded against the pursuer.