Glass v. Paisley Race Committee [1902] ScotLR 40_17 (16 October 1902)

Glass v. Paisley Race Committee [1902] ScotLR 40_17 (16 October 1902)

The directions sought by the defenders were too broad and would have improperly exempted them from liability regardless of the facts. The defenders, as lessors who invited the public onto the ground for a fee, could not absolve themselves of all responsibility for the safety of structures erected by tenants. The bill of exceptions was also defective for failing to comply with statutory requirements.

Citation
[1902] ScotLR 40_17
Parties
Pursuer: Robert Glass; Defender: Paisley Race Committee
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 October 1902
Procedural Posture
Reparation (damages) / Bill of Exceptions After Jury Trial
Outcome
bill of exceptions refused; verdict for pursuer stands
Legal Topics
Liability of Lessors, Duty of Care, Collapse of Structure, Statutory Compliance, Jury Directions
Tort Landlord and Tenant Personal Injury Liability of Lessors Duty of Care Collapse of Structure Statutory Compliance Jury Directions

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Glass

Pursuer

Paisley Race Committee

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (damages) / Bill of Exceptions After Jury Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the lessor (Paisley Race Committee) is liable for injuries caused by the collapse of a stand erected by a sub-tenant on leased ground.
  2. 2 Whether the directions requested by the defenders regarding exemption from liability were correct in law and should have been given to the jury.
  3. 3 Whether the bill of exceptions complied with statutory requirements under the Court of Session Act 1868, section 35.

Ratio Decidendi

The directions sought by the defenders were too broad and would have improperly exempted them from liability regardless of the facts. The defenders, as lessors who invited the public onto the ground for a fee, could not absolve themselves of all responsibility for the safety of structures erected by tenants. The bill of exceptions was also defective for failing to comply with statutory requirements.

Court Disposition

bill of exceptions refused; verdict for pursuer stands

Orders

  • Bill of exceptions refused.
  • Jury verdict for pursuer upheld.