Melville v. Renfrewshire County Council [1919] ScotLR 68 (15 November 1919)

Melville v. Renfrewshire County Council [1919] ScotLR 68 (15 November 1919)

There is no duty on a landowner to fence or make safe a dangerous place on private property unless the danger is in immediate proximity to a public road. In this case, the accident occurred fifty feet from the public road, and thus the defenders owed no duty to the deceased. The pursuer's averments did not disclose a relevant case in law.

Citation
[1919] ScotLR 68
Parties
Pursuer: Mrs Sarah Hume or Melville; Defender: Renfrewshire County Council
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
15 November 1919
Procedural Posture
Reparation (negligence) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, Second Division
Outcome
action dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Duty of Care, Proximity, Dangerous Premises, Liability of Landowners
Tort Property Law Negligence Duty of Care Proximity Dangerous Premises Liability of Landowners

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 1 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs Sarah Hume or Melville

Pursuer

Renfrewshire County Council

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation (negligence) / Appeal From Sheriff Court to Court of Session Inner House, Second Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defenders owed a duty to fence or otherwise make safe a dangerous slope on their private road, which was unfenced and led off a public highway, where a member of the public inadvertently strayed and suffered fatal injury.
  2. 2 Whether the danger was in 'immediate proximity' to the public road so as to impose liability on the defenders.

Ratio Decidendi

There is no duty on a landowner to fence or make safe a dangerous place on private property unless the danger is in immediate proximity to a public road. In this case, the accident occurred fifty feet from the public road, and thus the defenders owed no duty to the deceased. The pursuer's averments did not disclose a relevant case in law.

Court Disposition

action dismissed

Orders

  • Recall of the Sheriff-Substitute's interlocutor.
  • Dismissal of the action.