Thomson v. William Baird & Co., Ltd [1903] ScotLR 41_152 (26 November 1903)
A claim or notice under the Workmen's Compensation Act cannot be treated as notice under the Employers Liability Act; no relevant averment of liability at common law was established, as the employer is not personally bound to ensure a lookout is appointed for every squad.
- Citation
- [1903] ScotLR 41_152
- Parties
- Pursuer/appellant: William Thomson; Defenders/respondents: William Baird & Company, Limited
- Jurisdiction
- Scotland
- Judgment Date
- 26 November 1903
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Master and Servant, Employers' Liability, Workmen's Compensation, Notice Requirements, Negligence, Dangerous System
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
William Thomson
Pursuer/appellant
William Baird & Company, Limited
Defenders/respondents
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Inner House, First Division, Court of Session
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether notice given under the Workmen's Compensation Act constitutes notice under the Employers Liability Act
- 2 Whether the employer is liable at common law for failing to provide a warning system for workmen repairing a railway
Ratio Decidendi
A claim or notice under the Workmen's Compensation Act cannot be treated as notice under the Employers Liability Act; no relevant averment of liability at common law was established, as the employer is not personally bound to ensure a lookout is appointed for every squad.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- action dismissed with expenses
- second and first pleas-in-law for defenders sustained
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment