PRIORY HEALTHCARE LIMITED AGAINST HIGHLAND HEALTH BOARD [2019] ScotCS CSOH_17 (20 February 2019)

PRIORY HEALTHCARE LIMITED AGAINST HIGHLAND HEALTH BOARD [2019] ScotCS CSOH_17 (20 February 2019)

The pursuer failed to aver a relevant case that a contract was formed between the parties on any of the advanced bases (agency, adoption, ratification, personal bar, or agency of necessity). The statutory framework did not impose a continuing obligation on the defender in the circumstances, and the implied term was unnecessary given statutory protections for the patient. Accordingly, the pursuer's case is irrelevant.

Citation
[2019] ScotCS CSOH_17
Parties
Pursuer: Priory Healthcare Limited; Defender: Highland Health Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
20 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Commercial Court Action / Debate on Relevancy and Specification
Outcome
Pursuer's case held irrelevant; case put out by order for further procedure on disposal.
Legal Topics
Contract Formation, Implied Terms, Agency of Necessity, Statutory Duties of Health Authorities, Personal Bar, Ratification, Mental Health Care Funding
Contract Law Public Law Health Law Contract Formation Implied Terms Agency of Necessity Statutory Duties of Health Authorities Personal Bar +2 more

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Priory Healthcare Limited

Pursuer

Highland Health Board

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Court Action / Debate on Relevancy and Specification

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contract existed between the pursuer and defender for the continued care of the patient after 30 April 2017
  2. 2 Whether an implied term prevented unilateral termination of the contract by the defender if it would breach statutory duties and place the patient at risk
  3. 3 Whether agency of necessity, adoption, ratification, or personal bar established contractual liability

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to aver a relevant case that a contract was formed between the parties on any of the advanced bases (agency, adoption, ratification, personal bar, or agency of necessity). The statutory framework did not impose a continuing obligation on the defender in the circumstances, and the implied term was unnecessary given statutory protections for the patient. Accordingly, the pursuer's case is irrelevant.

Court Disposition

Pursuer's case held irrelevant; case put out by order for further procedure on disposal.