Baird v. S. Higginbotham & Co., Ltd [1901] ScotLR 38_479 (14 March 1901)

Baird v. S. Higginbotham & Co., Ltd [1901] ScotLR 38_479 (14 March 1901)

Once an action has been dismissed, the Court is not entitled to entertain a subsequent motion to assess compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897; such a motion must be made before dismissal.

Citation
[1901] ScotLR 38_479
Parties
Pursuer: Mary Stewart or Baird; Defender: S. Higginbotham & Company, Limited; Defender: Hugh Baird
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
14 March 1901
Procedural Posture
Reparation / Motion After Dismissal
Outcome
motion refused
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Employer Liability, Procedural Time Limits
Employment Law Personal Injury Workmen's Compensation Employer Liability Procedural Time Limits

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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mary Stewart or Baird

Pursuer

S. Higginbotham & Company, Limited

Defender

Hugh Baird

Defender

Procedural Posture

Reparation / Motion After Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a claim for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 can be entertained after dismissal of a common law action as irrelevant
  2. 2 Interpretation of section 1(4) of the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897 regarding timing and procedure

Ratio Decidendi

Once an action has been dismissed, the Court is not entitled to entertain a subsequent motion to assess compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1897; such a motion must be made before dismissal.

Court Disposition

motion refused

Orders

  • Prayer of the note refused