Millers v. The North British Locomotive Co., Ltd [1909] ScotLR 755 (01 June 1909)

Millers v. The North British Locomotive Co., Ltd [1909] ScotLR 755 (01 June 1909)

The deceased had no right or duty to be where the accident occurred; his presence was unaccounted for and not connected to his employment; the onus of proof was not discharged by the appellants; therefore, the accident did not arise out of and in the course of employment and no compensation is payable.

Citation
[1909] ScotLR 755
Parties
Appellants: Jane Carrick or Miller, Hugh Miller, Jeanie Miller; Respondents: The North British Locomotive Company, Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
01 June 1909
Procedural Posture
Appeal From Arbitration (stated Case) Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Inner House, Court of Session (final Appellate Review)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; questions answered in the negative.
Legal Topics
Workmen's Compensation, Accident Arising Out of Employment, Burden of Proof, Remit for Further Evidence
Employment Law Compensation Law Workmen's Compensation Accident Arising Out of Employment Burden of Proof Remit for Further 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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jane Carrick or Miller, Hugh Miller, Jeanie Miller

Appellants

The North British Locomotive Company, Limited

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal From Arbitration (stated Case) Under Workmen's Compensation Act 1906 / Inner House, Court of Session (final Appellate Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accident to the deceased arose out of and in the course of his employment
  2. 2 Whether respondents are liable to pay compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906

Ratio Decidendi

The deceased had no right or duty to be where the accident occurred; his presence was unaccounted for and not connected to his employment; the onus of proof was not discharged by the appellants; therefore, the accident did not arise out of and in the course of employment and no compensation is payable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; questions answered in the negative.

Orders

  • No compensation payable to appellants under the Workmen's Compensation Act 1906.
  • Motion to remit for further evidence refused.