Mustard v Paterson [1922] ScotCS CSIH_5 (23 November 1922)

Mustard v Paterson [1922] ScotCS CSIH_5 (23 November 1922)

The law of Scotland incorporates the Prætor's Edict so as to impose strict liability on stablers for animals entrusted to their care, unless the stabler proves the loss or injury was due to damnum fatale, act of the King's enemies, or the pursuer's fault. The defender failed to discharge this burden, providing no explanation for the injury to the horse, and is therefore liable for the loss.

Citation
[1922] ScotCS CSIH_5
Parties
Pursuer: Mustard; Defender: Paterson
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
23 November 1922
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff to Court of Session (inner House)
Outcome
appeal dismissed; judgment for pursuer affirmed
Legal Topics
Liability of Stablers, Application of Prætor's Edict, Burden of Proof in Bailment, Damnum Fatale, Standard of Care for Custodians
Contract Bailment Roman Law Influence Liability of Stablers Application of Prætor's Edict Burden of Proof in Bailment Damnum Fatale Standard of Care for Custodians

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

Parties

Mustard

Pursuer

Paterson

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff to Court of Session (inner House)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the Prætor's Edict 'Nautæ, caupones, stabularii' apply to livery stable keepers in Scotland?
  2. 2 What is the standard of liability for stablers under Scots law?
  3. 3 What exceptions relieve a stabler from liability for loss or damage to animals in their custody?

Ratio Decidendi

The law of Scotland incorporates the Prætor's Edict so as to impose strict liability on stablers for animals entrusted to their care, unless the stabler proves the loss or injury was due to damnum fatale, act of the King's enemies, or the pursuer's fault. The defender failed to discharge this burden, providing no explanation for the injury to the horse, and is therefore liable for the loss.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed; judgment for pursuer affirmed

Orders

  • Defender to pay pursuer £69 0s. 6d. in damages