Foote v. Shaw Stewart and Others (Directors of Greenock Hospital and Infirmary) [1911] ScotLR 39 (04 November 1911)

Foote v. Shaw Stewart and Others (Directors of Greenock Hospital and Infirmary) [1911] ScotLR 39 (04 November 1911)

The directors of a public hospital are only obliged to provide competent medical staff; absent a specific and precisely averred contract, they are not liable for negligent or unskilful treatment by those staff. The pursuer failed to aver any such special contract, rendering the action irrelevant.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 39
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Joicey Marion Brown or Foote; Defenders: Sir Hugh Shaw Stewart and Others (Directors of Greenock Hospital and Infirmary)
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
04 November 1911
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Dismissal at First Instance
Outcome
appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to
Legal Topics
Hospital Liability, Negligence, Public Hospital Obligations, Contract for Medical Services
Tort Contract Medical Law Hospital Liability Negligence Public Hospital Obligations Contract for Medical Services

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

Parties

Mrs Joicey Marion Brown or Foote

Pursuer

Sir Hugh Shaw Stewart and Others (Directors of Greenock Hospital and Infirmary)

Defenders

Procedural Posture

Civil / Appeal (reclaiming Motion) From Dismissal at First Instance

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether directors of a public hospital are liable for negligent or unskilful treatment by hospital staff to a paying patient
  2. 2 Whether a special contract existed imposing a higher duty on the hospital directors beyond providing competent staff

Ratio Decidendi

The directors of a public hospital are only obliged to provide competent medical staff; absent a specific and precisely averred contract, they are not liable for negligent or unskilful treatment by those staff. The pursuer failed to aver any such special contract, rendering the action irrelevant.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; interlocutor of Lord Ordinary adhered to

Orders

  • Action dismissed as irrelevant
  • Pursuer to pay expenses