The Court has no power under the Supreme Court Act to award interest on damages sums recoverable by the Plaintiff but which had been paid before the commencement of proceedings Judges: Waller LJ Citations: Times 28-May-1998, Gazette 17-Jun-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 862, [1998] 3 WLR 457, [1999] QB 297, [1998] 3 All ER 203 Links: … Continue reading I M Properties Plc v Cape and Dalgleish (a Firm): CA 20 May 1998
The applicant sought damages for the wrongful termination of her lease by the respondent. The landlords re-entered in default of payment of the rent. The premises had been sub-let, and she sought damages for the loss of rental profits. Held: The judge had admitted evidence which was not in formal form, but it was within … Continue reading Jaura v Ahmed: CA 21 Feb 2002
The claimant claimed under his fire insurance with the defendants. He sought damages for their delay in processing the claim. Held: The power to award interest on damages is discretionary. The judge had refused to allow interest, at a rate which applied at different times following the damage. He could do so, because of the … Continue reading Adcock v Co-Operative Insurance Society Ltd: CA 26 Apr 2000
The claimant was injured in a car accident in France. The defendant insurer said that the quantification of damages was to be according to French law and the calculation of interest also. The claimant said that English law applied. Held: The assessment of damages is a procedural matter, and is governed by the law of … Continue reading Knight v Axa Assurances: QBD 24 Jul 2009
A surveyor’s negligent valuation had led to the plaintiff obtaining what turned out to be inadequate security for his loan. A cause of action against a valuer for his negligent valuation arises when a relevant and measurable loss is first recorded. Earlier decisions of the house had settled the liability for damages and the amount … Continue reading Nykredit Mortgage Bank Plc v Edward Erdman Group Ltd (No 2): HL 27 Nov 1997
The appellants had overpaid under a mistake of law very substantial sums in VAT over several years. The excess had been repaid, but with simple interest and not compound interest, which the now claimed (together with other taxpayers amounting to 17 . .
