D Geddes (Contractors) Ltd v Neil Johnson Health & Safety Services Ltd [2017] ScotCS CSOH_42 (14 March 2017)

D Geddes (Contractors) Ltd v Neil Johnson Health & Safety Services Ltd [2017] ScotCS CSOH_42 (14 March 2017)

The court held that there is no absolute rule barring recovery of a criminal penalty from a third party in cases of strict liability offences where the claimant is not culpable or negligent. The pursuer has pled a relevant case for proof, and the ex turpi causa defence will only succeed if the defender establishes that the pursuer was responsible (including by negligence) for the offence.

Citation
[2017] ScotCS CSOH_42
Parties
Pursuer: D Geddes (Contractors) Limited; Defender: Neil Johnson Health & Safety Services Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory (debate on Preliminary Issue)
Outcome
Proof before answer allowed; all pleas in law left standing; case to be put out by order for timetabling discussion.
Legal Topics
Ex Turpi Causa, Strict Liability, Professional Negligence, Recoverability of Criminal Penalties, Public Policy
Tort Contract Health and Safety Law Ex Turpi Causa Strict Liability Professional Negligence Recoverability of Criminal Penalties Public Policy

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 2 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

D Geddes (Contractors) Limited

Pursuer

Neil Johnson Health & Safety Services Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory (debate on Preliminary Issue)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a party convicted of a strict liability criminal offence can recover the amount of a fine from a negligent professional advisor
  2. 2 Whether the ex turpi causa principle bars such recovery in cases of strict liability offences

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there is no absolute rule barring recovery of a criminal penalty from a third party in cases of strict liability offences where the claimant is not culpable or negligent. The pursuer has pled a relevant case for proof, and the ex turpi causa defence will only succeed if the defender establishes that the pursuer was responsible (including by negligence) for the offence.

Court Disposition

Proof before answer allowed; all pleas in law left standing; case to be put out by order for timetabling discussion.

Orders

  • Proof before answer allowed on the pursuer's case for recovery of the fine.
  • All pleas in law left standing.