Brodin v Seljan [1973] ScotCS CSOH_3 (16 May 1973)

Brodin v Seljan [1973] ScotCS CSOH_3 (16 May 1973)

Section 1(3) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 applies to accidents occurring in Scotland, rendering contractual exclusions of employer liability for negligence unenforceable in Scotland, regardless of the proper law of the contract.

Citation
[1973] ScotCS CSOH_3
Parties
Pursuer: Brodin; First Defender: A/R Seljan
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 May 1973
Procedural Posture
Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Pleas in Law and Relevancy
Outcome
Pursuer's fourth plea-in-law sustained; first defenders' second and third pleas-in-law repelled; specified averments excluded from probation; proof before answer allowed quoad ultra.
Legal Topics
Proper Law of Contract, Statutory Interpretation, Exclusion of Liability, Application of Foreign Law, Public Policy
Conflict of Laws Employment Law Personal Injury Proper Law of Contract Statutory Interpretation Exclusion of Liability Application of Foreign Law Public Policy

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brodin

Pursuer

A/R Seljan

First Defender

Procedural Posture

Civil / Interlocutory Judgment on Pleas in Law and Relevancy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does section 1(3) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 apply to a contract of employment governed by Norwegian law when the accident occurred in Scotland?
  2. 2 Is a contractual provision excluding employer liability for negligence unenforceable in Scotland under Scots law, regardless of the proper law of the contract?

Ratio Decidendi

Section 1(3) of the Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 applies to accidents occurring in Scotland, rendering contractual exclusions of employer liability for negligence unenforceable in Scotland, regardless of the proper law of the contract.

Court Disposition

Pursuer's fourth plea-in-law sustained; first defenders' second and third pleas-in-law repelled; specified averments excluded from probation; proof before answer allowed quoad ultra.

Orders

  • Sustain pursuer's fourth plea-in-law
  • Repel first defenders' second and third pleas-in-law