Evans v. Edinburgh Corporation and Others [1915] ScotLR 723 (11 June 1915)

Evans v. Edinburgh Corporation and Others [1915] ScotLR 723 (11 June 1915)

The pursuer failed to aver facts sufficient to establish either statutory or common law liability against the owners or the municipal authority; the mere existence of a door opening outwards onto a public thoroughfare, without more, does not constitute negligence or statutory breach; no relevant averments as to the status of the road or prior accidents; action dismissed.

Citation
[1915] ScotLR 723
Parties
Pursuer: John Evans; Defender: Provost, Magistrates, and Councillors of the City of Edinburgh; Defender: Thomas Binnie; Defender: Peter Russell
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
11 June 1915
Procedural Posture
Reparation Action / Appeal From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor
Outcome
action dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Statutory Liability, Obstruction of Highway, Duty of Care, Municipal Authority Powers
Tort Statutory Interpretation Local Government Law Negligence Statutory Liability Obstruction of Highway Duty of Care Municipal Authority Powers

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

Parties

John Evans

Pursuer

Provost, Magistrates, and Councillors of the City of Edinburgh

Defender

Thomas Binnie

Defender

Peter Russell

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation Action / Appeal From Lord Ordinary's Interlocutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether owners of property are liable for injuries caused by a door opening outwards onto a public thoroughfare
  2. 2 Whether the road authority (Edinburgh Corporation) is liable for failing to compel owners to alter the door
  3. 3 Whether relevant statutory or common law duties exist in these circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to aver facts sufficient to establish either statutory or common law liability against the owners or the municipal authority; the mere existence of a door opening outwards onto a public thoroughfare, without more, does not constitute negligence or statutory breach; no relevant averments as to the status of the road or prior accidents; action dismissed.

Court Disposition

action dismissed

Orders

  • interlocutor of Lord Ordinary recalled
  • first plea-in-law for each set of defenders sustained