MacDonald v Glasgow Corporation
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 17 November 1972 |
| Date | 17 November 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 5. |
| Court | Court of Session (Inner House - First Division) |
FIRST DIVISION.
Lord Keith.
ProcessJury trialForm of issueInterest on Damages (Scotland) Act, 1958 (6 and 7 Eliz. II, cap. 61), secs. 1 (1) and 1 (1A)Interest on Damages (Scotland) Act, 1971 (1971, cap. 31), sec. 1 (1).
Sec. 1 of the Interest on Damages (Scotland) Act, 1958 (as substituted by sec. 1 (1) of the Interest on Damages (Scotland) Act, 1971) enacts:"(1) Where a court pronounces an interlocutor decerning for payment by any person of a sum of money as damages, the interlocutor may include decree for payment by that person of interest, at such rate or rates as may be specified in the interlocutor, on the whole or any part of that sum for the whole or any part of the period between the date when the right of action arose and the date of the interlocutor. (1A) Where a court pronounces an interlocutor decerning for payment of a sum which consists of or includes damages or solatium in respect of personal injuries sustained by the pursuer or any other person, then (without prejudice to the exercise of the power conferred by subsection (1) of this section in relation to any part of that sum which does not represent such damages or solatium) the court shall exercise that power so as to include in that sum interest on those damages and on that solatium or on such part of each as the court considers appropriate, unless the court is satisfied that there are reasons special to the case why no interest should be given in respect thereof."
In an action of damages for personal injuries sustained by the pursuer whilst in the employment of the defenders, a proposed issue was lodged which was in the usual form. The action was sent to procedure roll on the defenders' motion where it was argued for the defenders that, in the light of the pursuer's averments relating to past and future solatium and past and future loss of earnings, insuperable difficulties would be encountered in applying to a jury's verdict in favour of the pursuer the provisions of the substituted section 1 (1A) and that special cause existed for allowing a proof rather than a jury trial. The pursuer, in these circumstances, proposed an amended issue.1The Lord Ordinary reported the case to the Inner House.
-
Held that in the particular circumstances of the case the amended forms of the proposed issue should be approved.
Godfrey Macdonald brought an action of damages against his employers, Glasgow Corporation, in respect of injuries sustained by him in an accident in the course of his employment with them. The elements of the pursuer's claim for damages were averred as (a) loss of earnings during a period of total incapacity, (b) a continuing loss of earnings by reason of his unfitness to do his pre-accident work, and (c) solatium for pain and suffering since the accident which was likely to continue indefinitely.
At the closing of the record the pursuer lodged an issue in the usual form. The case was sent to procedure roll where the pursuer sought leave to lodge an amended form of his issue. The Lord Ordinary (Keith) reported the case to the Inner House.
The Lord Ordinary's report was in the following terms:
When this case came before me in procedure roll it was argued for the defenders that, in the light of the pursuer's averments of loss and damage, insuperable difficulties would be encountered in applying to a jury's verdict in favour of the pursuer, should such a verdict be returned, the provisions of the Interest on Damages (Scotland) Act, 1971. It was therefore maintained that special cause existed for allowing proof rather than jury trial. Refer ence was made toMcFadyen v. Crudens Ltd., 1972 S.L.T. (Notes) 62,Cooper v. Pat Munro (Alness) Ltd., 1972 S.L.T. (Notes) 20, and McMahon v. J. & P. Coats Ltd., 1972 S.L.T. (Notes) 16.
The form of issue lodged by the pursuer is in the ordinary standard form for such cases, stating the total sum of damages claimed. I should have been disposed to the view that trial of the cause on that issue would be likely to present such difficulties to the application of the provisions of the Act of 1971, should that become necessary, as to constitute special cause for refusing jury...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Abdul Razak Ahmad v Majlis Bandaraya Johor Bahru
- Abdul Razak Ahmad v Majlis Bandaraya Johor Bahru
-
Girvan v Inverness Farmers Dairy (No 2)
...It included the sum of £120,000 for solatium. In accordance with the practice which was approved in MacDonald v. Glasgow Corporation, 1973 S.C. 52, for the purpose of enabling interest to be awarded on damages for the past under section 1(1A) of the Interest on Damages (Scotland) Act 1958 a......
-
Reclaiming Motion By Thomas Sheridan Against News Group Newspapers Limited
...For this reason, if a pursuer wants interest from a date earlier than the date of decree, he is advised (MacDonald v Glasgow Corporation 1973 SC 52) to divide up the claimed pre and post decree damages in his issue to enable the judge to apply interest at an appropriate rate (eg half the ju......