Philipps v. Humber [1904] ScotLR 41_626 (11 June 1904)

Philipps v. Humber [1904] ScotLR 41_626 (11 June 1904)

The relationship between Humber and Binnie was that of landlord and sub-tenant, not master and servant. There was no evidence of structural defect or incompetence in Binnie that Humber could have guarded against. The accident was due to Binnie's personal negligence, for which Humber was not liable. The landlord's duty does not extend to supervising the conduct of independent tenants in the absence of control or structural fault.

Citation
[1904] ScotLR 41_626
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Margaret Runciman or Philipps; Defender: Henry Binnie; Defender: Walter James Humber
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 June 1904
Procedural Posture
Reparation (damages for Death) / Motion for New Trial After Jury Verdict
Outcome
verdict set aside, new trial granted
Legal Topics
Liability to Public, Negligence, Vicarious Liability, Duty of Care, Landlord's Duty, Personal Negligence of Tenant
Tort Landlord and Tenant Liability to Public Negligence Vicarious Liability Duty of Care Landlord's Duty Personal Negligence of Tenant

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Margaret Runciman or Philipps

Pursuer

Henry Binnie

Defender

Walter James Humber

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (damages for Death) / Motion for New Trial After Jury Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is a landlord liable for injury to a member of the public caused by the personal negligence of his tenant on the premises?
  2. 2 Does the relationship between the landlord and the person in charge of the shooting-gallery constitute master and servant or landlord and tenant?
  3. 3 Does the landlord owe a duty to ensure the competence of a sub-tenant operating a hazardous activity on the premises?

Ratio Decidendi

The relationship between Humber and Binnie was that of landlord and sub-tenant, not master and servant. There was no evidence of structural defect or incompetence in Binnie that Humber could have guarded against. The accident was due to Binnie's personal negligence, for which Humber was not liable. The landlord's duty does not extend to supervising the conduct of independent tenants in the absence of control or structural fault.

Court Disposition

verdict set aside, new trial granted

Orders

  • Jury verdict for pursuer set aside
  • New trial ordered