Site icon swarb.co.uk

Gladwell v Steggall; 19 Jun 1839

References: 8 Scott 60, [1839] EngR 834, (1839) 5 Bing NC 733, (1839) 132 ER 1283
Links: Commonlii
The plaintiff was a girl of ten years of age claimed she had been negligently treated by the defendant surgeon and apothecary. She sued in an action ex delicto, alleging a breach of the contract under which they had been employed, though it was her father who had paid the bill.
A declaration in case stated that Plaintiff, an infant, had employed Defendant, a surgeon, to cure her, and then claimed damages for a misfeasance: Plea, that Plaintiff did not employ Defendant : Held, that it was immaterial by whom Defendant was employed ; or that, if material, Plaintiff’s submitting to Defendant’s treatment was sufficient proof of the allegation of employment by her.
This case is cited by:

Exit mobile version