Murray v. Denholm & Co. [1911] ScotLR 896 (01 July 1911)

Murray v. Denholm & Co. [1911] ScotLR 896 (01 July 1911)

Injury caused by a deliberate criminal assault by third parties is not 'injury by accident' within the meaning of section 1 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906, as the term 'accident' excludes wilful and intentional acts. Even if it were an accident, the injury did not arise out of the employment but from the malicious acts of outsiders, not from risks inherent to the employment.

Citation
[1911] ScotLR 896
Parties
Respondent: James Murray; Appellants: John Denholm & Company
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 July 1911
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Inner House, Court of Session, Second Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed; award of compensation set aside.
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Definition of Accident, Employer Liability, Injury by Criminal Act, Scope of Employment
Labour Law Tort Law Workmen's Compensation Definition of Accident Employer Liability Injury by Criminal Act Scope of Employment

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

Parties

James Murray

Respondent

John Denholm & Company

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Inner House, Court of Session, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether injury caused by criminal assault is 'injury by accident' under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906, section 1
  2. 2 Whether such accident arose out of the respondent's employment

Ratio Decidendi

Injury caused by a deliberate criminal assault by third parties is not 'injury by accident' within the meaning of section 1 of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906, as the term 'accident' excludes wilful and intentional acts. Even if it were an accident, the injury did not arise out of the employment but from the malicious acts of outsiders, not from risks inherent to the employment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; award of compensation set aside.

Orders

  • First question (whether injury was 'by accident') answered in the negative.
  • Unnecessary to answer the remaining questions.