McCOLL v STRATHCLYDE REGIONAL COUNCIL
| Jurisdiction | Scotland |
| Judgment Date | 29 June 1983 |
| Date | 29 June 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 23. |
| Court | Court of Session (Outer House) |
OUTER HOUSE.
Lord Jauncey.
Public healthWater supplyPowers of local authorityDuty to provide "a pure supply of wholesome water"Progressive fluoridation of water supply with a view to improving dental healthWhether ultra vires and a nuisanceWater (Scotland) Act 1980 (cap. 45), sections 6 (1)1 and 8.2.
Legal aidCost of vindicating right out of proportion to value of rightCircumstances where it is unreasonable to grant legal aidLegal Aid (Scotland) Act 1967 (cap. 43), section 1 (6B) (a)Legal Aid (Scotland) (General) Regulations 1960 (S.I. 1960 No. 2195), reg. 6 (1).
The petitioner was granted legal aid to interdict the local authority from implementing their decision to co-operate with the Health Board in the progressive fluoridation of the water supply, which was provided to the petitioner for domestic purposes. The objective of the fluoridation programme was to improve dental health, in particular of children.
The Water (Scotland) Act 1980 requires the local authority "to provide a supply of wholesome water to every part of their limits of supply". The petitioner claimed that the addition of fluoride had a dangerous effect on members of the population. She maintained that the addition of fluoride was ultra vires the powers of the local authority and in breach of their statutory duty. She also claimed that it was a nuisance.
Held (after a proof before answer) (1) that the harmful effects of fluoridation had not been proved.
(2) That the word "wholesome" in sections 6 (1) and 8 of the Water (Scotland) Act 1980 fell to be construed as relating to water which was free from contamination and pleasant to drink;
Attorney General of New Zealand v. Lower Hutt CorporationELR [1964] A.C. 1469 considered and distinguished.
(3) That fluoridation of the water supply with a view to improving the general dental health of the populace which in no way facilitated nor was incidental to the supply of wholesome water was outwith the powers of the Regional Council.
Observed that in considering whether or not legal aid should be granted consideration should be given to the cost of vindicating the right claimed in proportion to the value of the right.
Mrs Catherine M'Coll raised a petition against Strathclyde Regional Council, which had started a progressive fluoridation of the water supply,
praying the court "to interdict and prohibit the Respondents and all others acting under their authority from adding fluorosilicic acid and any other fluoride salts to the water supplied by them to the Petitioner, to her nuisance, and in breach of the terms of sections 10 and 64 of the Water (Scotland) Act 1946, as now re-enacted by sections 8 and 75 of the Water (Scotland) Act 1980"The petition and answers set forth inter alia:
"Stat. II. On 12th October 1977 a motion was passed in meeting by the Respondents that as a Water Authority they would co-operate with the Health Board in the progressive fluoridation of the water supplies under their control. On 13th September 1978 at a further meeting and after considering representation by interested parties, the Respondents affirmed their decision of 12th October 1977 to proceed with fluoridation.
Answer 2. Admitted.
Stat. III. Fluoridation of the water supply entails the addition to it of fluoride salts and in particular Fluorosilicic acid. Fluorosilicic acid is a highly toxic and corrosive liquid which is listed in Schedule 1 to the Petroleum (Corrosive Substances) Order 1970. The Petitioner has ascertained that the Respondents propose to install devices to add this substance to the water supplied by them and in particular have already made arrangements to commence adding fluoride to the water supplied in the Oban area on 20th October 1978, and thereafter progressively to their other supplies. The Petitioner is apprehensive that this substance will soon be added to the water supplied to her. Not known and not admitted what concentration of fluoride the Respondents intend to add to the water supplied by them. Quoad ultra the Respondents' averments in answer are denied in so far as not coinciding herewith. The Respondents are called upon to aver the date when they proposed to add fluoride to the Petitioner's water supply.
Answer 3. Admitted that the fluoridation of the water supply entails the addition of fluoride salts under explanation that fluoridation as proposed by the Respondents involves adjusting the concentration of fluoride in the water supply to one part per million. Said Schedule is referred to for its terms only. Admitted that the Respondents have made arrangements to commence adding fluoride to the water supply at Oban. Admitted subject to the explanation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board
...case, these include the value of self-determination (see, for example, S (An Infant) v S [1972] AC 24, 43 per Lord Reid; McColl v Strathclyde Regional Council 1983 SC 225, 241; Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789, 864 per Lord Goff of Chieveley). As well as underlying aspects of the......
-
New Health New Zealand Inc v ATTORNEY-GENERAL For and on Behalf of The Minister of Health
...treatment. New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council, above n 8, at [79]. McColl v Strathclyde Regional Council [1983] SC 225 Relevant legislation Overview [19] The importation, manufacture, distribution and use of chemicals including those used as medicines or to make me......
-
Grimstone v Epsom and St Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust
...case, these include the value of self-determination (see, for example , S (An Infant) v S [1972] AC 24, 43per Lord Reid;McColl v Strathclyde Regional Council 1983 SC 225, 241; Airedale NHS Trust v Bland [1993] AC 789, 864per Lord Goff of Chieveley). As well as underlying aspects of the comm......
-
New Health New Zealand Inc v South Taranaki District Council
...involving a breach of individual rights, of which the right to bodily integrity was in each case an element. 40 41 McColl v Strathclyde ([1983] SC 225; Milner v South Central SHA [2011] EWHC 218 Fluoridation of Public Water Supplies Act 1966 (WA); Fluoridation Act 1968 (Tas.); Water Fluorid......