Innes v. Fife Coal Co., Ltd [1901] ScotLR 38_239 (10 January 1901)

Innes v. Fife Coal Co., Ltd [1901] ScotLR 38_239 (10 January 1901)

On the pursuer's averments, the defenders, having let houses in close proximity to an unfenced and dangerous siding with knowledge that children would play there and cross to the bleaching green, may owe a duty to take precautions such as fencing or providing a shunter. The fact that the pursuer was the child's father does not bar him from seeking damages. The case is relevant and should proceed to jury trial.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 38_239
Parties
Pursuer: John Innes; Defender: Fife Coal Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
10 January 1901
Procedural Posture
Reparation (personal Injury/death) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, on Relevancy of Action
Outcome
appeal sustained; action allowed to proceed to jury trial
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Liability for Children, Contributory Negligence, Volenti Non Fit Injuria
Tort Personal Injury Occupiers' Liability Negligence Duty of Care Liability for Children Contributory Negligence Volenti Non Fit Injuria

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

Parties

John Innes

Pursuer

Fife Coal Company, Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (personal Injury/death) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session, Inner House, on Relevancy of Action

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders owed a duty to fence the siding or otherwise protect children from danger on their property
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer was personally barred from claiming damages due to his own conduct or knowledge of the risk
  3. 3 Whether the maxim volenti non fit injuria or contributory negligence applied to bar recovery

Ratio Decidendi

On the pursuer's averments, the defenders, having let houses in close proximity to an unfenced and dangerous siding with knowledge that children would play there and cross to the bleaching green, may owe a duty to take precautions such as fencing or providing a shunter. The fact that the pursuer was the child's father does not bar him from seeking damages. The case is relevant and should proceed to jury trial.

Court Disposition

appeal sustained; action allowed to proceed to jury trial

Orders

  • Issues ordered for jury trial