McClafferty v British Telecommunications plc 1987 SLT 327
Citation: McClafferty v British Telecommunications plc 1987 SLT 327
Rule of thumb: On public paths, what level of trip hazard is needed for a personal injury case? It is a matter of degree – on public paths it is significantly than private, and on public paths it has to be a severe hazard.
Judgment:
In trip and slip accidents, the Court is likely to make a finding of contributory negligence, and in this instance it was 50%, ‘ …In Gordon v Glasgow Corporation and Innes v James K Neil & Co and Glasgow Corporation, both decisions unreported it was pointed out that it was always a question of degree whether negligence could be established where there was some degree of inequality of surface on a public footpath. In the former case, Lord President Clyde said: ‘There is no doubt that inequality of surface, even a very small one, may result in a similar mishap to a pedestrian. But the maintenance of complete uniformity on a city foot pavement is a counsel of perfection considerably above the standard attainable in practical administration. The question of whether there has been neglect of duty is always a question of degree’, Lord Ross
Warning: This is not professional legal advice. This is not professional legal education advice. Please obtain professional guidance before embarking on any legal course of action. This is just an interpretation of a Judgment by persons of legal insight & varying levels of legal specialism, experience & expertise. Please read the Judgment yourself and form your own interpretation of it with professional assistance.