Hamilton v. Fife Health Board [1993] ScotCS CSIH_4 (24 March 1993)
The court held that section 1(1) of the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976 applies to cases where a child is born alive but dies as a result of injuries sustained before birth. The phrase 'personal injuries sustained by him' includes injuries inflicted before birth but which impair the child's physical condition at and after birth. The right to claim damages by relatives is not excluded in such circumstances, and the Lord Ordinary's narrow interpretation was incorrect.
- Citation
- [1993] ScotCS CSIH_4
- Parties
- Pursuer: Hamilton; Defender/respondent: Fife Health Board
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 24 March 1993
- Procedural Posture
- Civil Appeal (reclaiming Motion) / Appeal Against Interlocutor Dismissing Action at First Instance
- Outcome
- Reclaiming motion sustained; interlocutor dismissing the action recalled; case remitted for further procedure.
- Legal Topics
- Damages for Death, Ante Natal Injury, Rights of Relatives, Statutory Construction, Legal Personality
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Hamilton
Pursuer
Fife Health Board
Defender/respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal (reclaiming Motion) / Appeal Against Interlocutor Dismissing Action at First Instance
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether parents can claim damages under the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976 for the death of a child caused by injuries sustained before birth
- 2 Interpretation of 'personal injuries sustained by him' in section 1(1) of the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that section 1(1) of the Damages (Scotland) Act 1976 applies to cases where a child is born alive but dies as a result of injuries sustained before birth. The phrase 'personal injuries sustained by him' includes injuries inflicted before birth but which impair the child's physical condition at and after birth. The right to claim damages by relatives is not excluded in such circumstances, and the Lord Ordinary's narrow interpretation was incorrect.
Court Disposition
Reclaiming motion sustained; interlocutor dismissing the action recalled; case remitted for further procedure.
Orders
- Recall of the interlocutor of 21st November 1991 sustaining the second plea-in-law for the defenders and dismissing the action in relation to the first and second conclusions.
- Repel the second plea-in-law for the defenders.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment