JEAN LAMB v. ALISON WRAY [2013] ScotSC 105 (22 November 2013)

JEAN LAMB v. ALISON WRAY [2013] ScotSC 105 (22 November 2013)

The pursuer failed to aver, even briefly, the nature of the usual and normal or standard practice for removal of cotton wool rolls and failed to aver that no competent practitioner would have deviated from such practice; thus, evidence regarding standard practice is inadmissible and the requirements of Rule 36B.1 and fair notice were not met.

Citation
[2013] ScotSC 105
Parties
Pursuer: Jean Lamb; Defender: Alison Wray
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
22 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Action (clinical Negligence) / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence; Procedural Hearing Appointed
Outcome
Defender's objection sustained; evidence regarding standard practice inadmissible; procedural hearing appointed.
Legal Topics
Pleadings, Fair Notice, Professional Negligence, Clinical Negligence, Personal Injury
Tort Medical Negligence Pleadings Fair Notice Professional Negligence Clinical Negligence Personal Injury

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jean Lamb

Pursuer

Alison Wray

Defender

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Action (clinical Negligence) / Interlocutory Ruling on Admissibility of Evidence; Procedural Hearing Appointed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether pursuer's pleadings sufficiently averred facts necessary to establish clinical negligence
  2. 2 Whether evidence regarding standard practice for removal of cotton wool rolls is admissible

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer failed to aver, even briefly, the nature of the usual and normal or standard practice for removal of cotton wool rolls and failed to aver that no competent practitioner would have deviated from such practice; thus, evidence regarding standard practice is inadmissible and the requirements of Rule 36B.1 and fair notice were not met.

Court Disposition

Defender's objection sustained; evidence regarding standard practice inadmissible; procedural hearing appointed.

Orders

  • Sustains defender's objection to admission of evidence regarding standard practice for removal of cotton wool rolls.
  • Appoints cause to procedural roll hearing on 22 November 2013 at 9.45am.