Bothwell v British Railways Board [1999] ScotCS 164 (2 July 1999)

Bothwell v British Railways Board [1999] ScotCS 164 (2 July 1999)

Sufficient specification of previous accidents was provided in the pleadings when read as a whole, notwithstanding improper references to evidential material, which should not be relied upon to cure any deficiency.

Citation
[1999] ScotCS 164
Parties
Pursuer: Gregory Francis Bothwell; Defender: British Railways Board
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
02 July 1999
Procedural Posture
Civil Action for Damages / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy of Pleadings
Outcome
Averments admitted to probation; proof before answer granted; all pleas standing.
Legal Topics
Pleading Standards, Relevancy of Averments, Admissibility of Evidence
Personal Injury Tort Law Pleading Standards Relevancy of Averments Admissibility of Evidence

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregory Francis Bothwell

Pursuer

British Railways Board

Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil Action for Damages / Procedure Roll Debate on Relevancy of Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether references to a TV programme and HSE report in pleadings are permissible
  2. 2 Whether there is sufficient specification of previous accidents in the pleadings

Ratio Decidendi

Sufficient specification of previous accidents was provided in the pleadings when read as a whole, notwithstanding improper references to evidential material, which should not be relied upon to cure any deficiency.

Court Disposition

Averments admitted to probation; proof before answer granted; all pleas standing.

Orders

  • Averments regarding previous accidents admitted to probation
  • Proof before answer granted