Gilmour v. East Renfrewshire Council [2002] ScotCS 152 (29th May, 2002)

Gilmour v. East Renfrewshire Council [2002] ScotCS 152 (29th May, 2002)

The pursuer's averments are relevant because all three alleged defects (failure to clear food, slippery construction, and worn maintenance) could together or separately have contributed to the accident, and the pleadings sufficiently aver causation and foreseeability. The statutory and common law cases are both...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] ScotCS 152
Parties
Pursuer: Aileen Gilmour; Defender: East Renfrewshire Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury / Plea to Relevancy (procedure Roll)
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed on the whole of the pursuer's averments.
Legal Topics
Employer's Duty of Care, Workplace Safety, Negligence, Statutory Duty, Causation
Employment Law Personal Injury Health and Safety Employer's Duty of Care Workplace Safety Negligence Statutory Duty Causation

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aileen Gilmour

Pursuer

East Renfrewshire Council

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury / Plea to Relevancy (procedure Roll)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer's averments disclose a relevant case in negligence and under the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992.
  2. 2 Whether there is a sufficient causal link between the alleged defects and the accident.
  3. 3 Whether foreseeability is adequately pled in relation to the construction and maintenance of the floor.

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's averments are relevant because all three alleged defects (failure to clear food, slippery construction, and worn maintenance) could together or separately have contributed to the accident, and the pleadings sufficiently aver causation and foreseeability. The statutory and common law cases are both relevantly pled.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed on the whole of the pursuer's averments.

Orders

  • Case to proceed to proof before answer.