Category: Personal Injury

Bailey and Others v Glaxosmithkline (UK) Ltd: QBD 29 Jul 2016

Several claimants sought damages saying that they had suffered side effects from taking a drug Seroxat manufactured by the defendant. The defendant now continued its application to have the claims struck out as disproportionate in the ratio of expense to any possible benefit to the claimants.
Held: The claim should continue to a limited extent.

Judges:

Foskett J

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1975 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.567817

LAT v East Somerset NHS Trust (Now Yeovil District Hospital NHS Foundation Trust): QBD 8 Jul 2016

Application on behalf of the claimant under CPR 25.7 for an interim payment in respect of his claim for damages against the defendant arising out of the defendant’s negligent failure properly to treat him during the neonatal period and in particular in failing to treat his hypoglycaemia appropriately.

Judges:

Reddihough HHJ

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1610 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Professional Negligence

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.567067

KLM v EUI Ltd: QBD 24 Jun 2016

Application on behalf of the claimant under CPR 25.7 for an interim payment in respect of her claim for damages for personal injuries, loss and damage arising out of a road traffic accident. She was a passenger in a car driven by her boyfriend, who was insured by the defendant.

Judges:

Reddihough HHJ

Citations:

[2016] EWHC 1497 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.566258

Collier v Crapper: CA 9 Feb 2001

The court rejected an application for leave to appeal. The defendant had turned right out of a slow moving land of traffic into the path of the plaintiff who was riding a motor cycle along the off-side of the queue of vehicles.
Held: It could not be said that the judge’s findings were inappropriate.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 232

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Road Traffic, Personal Injury

Updated: 18 June 2022; Ref: scu.217974

Sir W G Armstrong, Whitworth, and Co Ltd v Redford: HL 26 Mar 1920

By a rule of certain works all employees had to leave the works for an hour at 1 p.m. They might, however, go to a canteen run by the employers at which no profits were made, and which was entered from the street though contained in the same block of buildings as the works. A girl machinist employed in the works fell on the stairs of the canteen when returning to her work after the dinner hour. The arbitrator held that the accident arose out of and in the course of the respondent’s employment and awarded her compensation.
The Court of Appeal affirmed his award.
Held (diss. Lords Finlay and Dunedin) that on the evidence the respondent had proved such a case of an accident arising ‘in the course of’ her employment as could not be disturbed on grounds of law.
Decision of the Court of Appeal, 121 L.T.R. 293, affirmed.

Judges:

Lords Finlay, Dunedin, Sumner, Parmoor, and Wrenbury

Citations:

[1920] UKHL 749, 57 SLR 749

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.631515

Price v Guest, Keen, and Nettlefolds, Ltd: HL 17 Jun 1918

On 10th March 1916 a workman who had been employed by the respondents for the preceding three years was killed by an accident in one of the respondents’ collieries. The respondents disputed the method of computing the compensation due to his dependants. From 1st to 13th July 1915 the deceased workman worked ‘day by day.’ From 14th to 21st July owing to a strike he did not work. At the end of the strike he returned to work at increased wages. The dependants claimed that during the period of strike the deceased was not employed by the respondents and the compensation fell to be computed on the basis of his subsequent earnings. The respondents contended that his employment had been continuous.
Held (dis. L. C. Finlay) that the onus of proving the discontinuance of the employment was on the appellant, and there was no evidence to establish her contention.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Finlay), Lords Atkinson and Wrenbury

Citations:

[1918] UKHL 361, 56 SLR 361

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.631478

Wallett and Others v Vickers: QBD 14 Nov 2018

‘Two motorists drive alongside each other on a dual carriageway at speeds approaching twice the speed limit, each determined to be the first to reach the point where the road narrows to a single lane and refusing to give way to the other. As the road begins to narrow, the motorist in the inner lane loses control of his vehicle and collides with other vehicles on the opposite carriageway, sustaining fatal injuries. His partner brings a claim for damages under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. In order to succeed it must be shown that the deceased would himself have been entitled to succeed in a claim for damages for negligence against the other driver. Issues of causation, ex turpi causa and contributory negligence arise.’

Judges:

Males J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 3088 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.628909

Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority v First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) (Criminal Injuries Compensation): CA 25 Oct 2018

Re-opening of dismissal of application – material change in medical condition.
Held: The Authority’s appeal succeeded.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 2367, [2018] WLR(D) 661

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.628680

Rosie v Mackay: HL 13 Nov 1911

The Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906, sec. 16(1), enacts-‘This Act shall come into operation on the first day of July 1907, but, except so far as it relates to references to medical referees and proceedings consequential thereon, shall not apply in any case where the accident happened before the commencement of this Act.’ Schedule II (17) ( b) gives an appeal to the House of Lords from a decision of the Court of Session.
In an arbitration under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897, arising out of an accident which occurred on 20th November 1906, the arbiter, with consent, remitted to a medical referee, and on his report, without further evidence, gave his decision reducing the compensation previously paid by a half. The employer appealed by stated case to the Court of Session, whose decision was that compensation should be ended.
Held that the House of Lords had no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal, as the words in the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906, sec. 16 (1), ‘proceedings consequential’ on references to medical referees, would not cover the case.

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 48, 49 SLR 48

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906 16(1)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619217

Kitchenham v Owners of SS ‘Johannesburg’: HL 2 Jun 1911

A sailor who had gone on shore, with leave, upon his return reached the quay alongside of which his ship was lying. The gangway which was the access to his ship was properly lighted. There was no evidence whether he reached the gangway, but he fell into the water between the quay and the ship, where his drowned body was afterwards found.
Held that, although there was an accident in the course of the sailor’s employment, there was no evidence that it arose out of this employment and his widow was not entitled to compensation.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Shaw, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 626, 49 SLR 626

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619202

Hewitt v Owners of SS ‘Duchess’: HL 15 Jun 1911

A master mariner, while his ship was lying in Bangor Roads, went ashore to a pier, as he was entitled to do. It was not proved whether he went upon the ship’s business or for his own purposes. On returning to the quay he hailed his ship for a boat to convey him on board. While waiting for the boat he fell off the quay and was drowned.
Held that there was no evidence that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment, and that his dependants were not entitled to receive compensation.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Gorell, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 627, 49 SLR 627

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compenpensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619201

Walters v Staveley Coal and Iron Co: HL 30 May 1911

The appellant’s employers made a pathway over lands belonging to them by which their workmen obtained access to their work by a route shorter than the public road. The workmen were permitted, but not bound or entitled, to use this short-cut. The pathway at a point three-quarters of a-mile from the place of work contained some steps, down which the appellant fell, injuring himself.
Held that the County Court Judge was right in deciding that the accident did not arise ‘in the course of the employment,’ and that there was no evidence upon which he could have decided the contrary.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Shaw, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 623

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.619198

Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau: SC 3 Aug 2016

The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of the European Regulations with UK law predated the Sixth Directive.
Held: ‘whichever special provision of the Fourth Directive the victim of a motor accident may have to have recourse, the compensation to which he or she is entitled is and remains the same. It is the same compensation as that to which the victim is entitled as against the driver responsible, or his or her insurer, or, that failing, as against the guarantee fund of the state of the accident. The compensation remains the same if and when the victim has recourse instead to the compensation body established in his own state of residence under article 6 or 7.’
‘the scheme of the Directives is clear, and that they do not leave it to individual member states to provide for compensation in accordance with any law that such states may choose. On the contrary, they proceed on the basis that a victim’s entitlement to compensation will be measured on a consistent basis, by reference to the law of the state of the accident, whichever of the routes to recovery provided by the Directives he or she invokes. In consequence, it also makes no difference to the measure of liability of the body or person ultimately responsible, which route is chosen. ‘

Judges:

Lord Mance, Lord Clarke, Lord Sumption, Lord Toulson,Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2016] UKSC 52, [2016] 1 WLR 3194, [2016] WLR(D) 453, UKSC 2015/0113, [2016] RTR 26, [2017] PIQR P3

Links:

Bailii, WLRD, Bailii Summary, SC

Statutes:

Sixth Directive 2009/103/EC, The Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At First Instance – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau QBD 17-Apr-2015
The claimant suffered injury in a road traffic accident in Greece. The responsible driver was uninsured. She claimed here under the MIB scheme, and the court was now asked whether Greek or UK law governed the assessment of damages.
Held: The . .
Leave – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau QBD 23-Apr-2015
Application for leave to appeal – granted . .
Overruled – Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau CA 27-Oct-2010
The claimant was injured when struck by a car in Spain, driven by an uninsured driver. He claimed here against the MIB. The 2003 Regulations under which he claimed had not been updated for the 2007 EU Regulations. The parties disputed which law . .
Cited – Harding v Wealands HL 5-Jul-2006
Claim in UK for Accident in Australia
The claimant had been a passenger in a car driven by his now partner. They had an accident in New South Wales. The car was insured in Australia. He sought leave to sue in England and Wales because Australian law would limit the damages.
Held: . .
Cited – Evans v The Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions and The Motor Insurers’ Bureau ECJ 4-Dec-2003
ECJ Reference for a preliminary ruling: High Court of Justice (England and Wales), Queen’s Bench Division – United Kingdom. Approximation of laws – Directive 84/5/EEC – Compulsory insurance against civil . .
Overruled – Bloy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 29-Nov-2013
. .
Cited – Marleasing SA v La Comercial Internacional de Alimentacion SA ECJ 13-Nov-1990
Sympathetic construction of national legislation
LMA OVIEDO sought a declaration that the contracts setting up Commercial International were void (a nullity) since they had been drawn up in order to defraud creditors. Commercial International relied on an EC . .
Cited – The United States of America v Nolan SC 21-Oct-2015
Mrs Nolan had been employed at a US airbase. When it closed, and she was made redundant, she complained that the appellant had not consulted properly on the redundancies. The US denied that it had responsibility to consult, and now appealed.
Cited – Cox v Ergo Versicherung Ag SC 2-Apr-2014
The deceased army officer serving in Germany died while cycling when hit by a driver insured under German law. His widow, the claimant, being domiciled in England brought her action here, claiming for bereavement and loss of dependency. The Court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Damages, European

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.570159

Mapfre Mutualidad Compania De Seguros Y Reaseguros Sa and Another v Keefe: CA 17 Jun 2015

Injury suffered whilst on holiday in Tenerife

Judges:

Moore-Bick, Black, Gloster LJJ

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 598, [2015] 2 CLC 15, [2016] Lloyd’s Rep IR 94, [2015] WLR(D) 265, [2016] 1 WLR 905, [2015] CP Rep 39

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 11(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Personal Injury, European

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.549104

Bloy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau: CA 29 Nov 2013

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 1543, [2014] 1 Lloyd’s Rep IR 75

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Followed – Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau CA 27-Oct-2010
The claimant was injured when struck by a car in Spain, driven by an uninsured driver. He claimed here against the MIB. The 2003 Regulations under which he claimed had not been updated for the 2007 EU Regulations. The parties disputed which law . .

Cited by:

Overruled – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau SC 3-Aug-2016
The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages, European

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.518495

Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau: QBD 16 Feb 2010

The UK claimant was seriously injured in Spain. The negligent car driver was not insured. The parties now disputed which law would apply in assessing the damages payable by the defendant.

Judges:

Owen J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 231 (QB), [2010] 1 All ER (Comm) 1128, [2010] RTR 35, [2010] Lloyd’s Rep IR 244

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation body) Regulations 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau CA 27-Oct-2010
The claimant was injured when struck by a car in Spain, driven by an uninsured driver. He claimed here against the MIB. The 2003 Regulations under which he claimed had not been updated for the 2007 EU Regulations. The parties disputed which law . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.401005

Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau: CA 27 Oct 2010

The claimant was injured when struck by a car in Spain, driven by an uninsured driver. He claimed here against the MIB. The 2003 Regulations under which he claimed had not been updated for the 2007 EU Regulations. The parties disputed which law would apply to assessment of damages.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The Regulations provide for English law to govern the measure of recovery, and there was nothing in the Sixth Directive to the contrary.
Moore-Bick LJ concluded first that regulation 13 must contemplate the victim being able to show the existence of liability on the part of the person responsible for the accident. The answer on this point lay, he considered, in the words ‘shall compensate the injured party in accordance with the provisions of article 1’ of the Second Directive. He went on: ‘I think it is reasonably clear from the recitals to the Second Directive that its purpose was to assimilate the position of the victim of an unidentified or uninsured driver or vehicle to that of the victim of an identified and insured driver or vehicle; it is not its purpose to require the establishment of a system of no-fault compensation. It is, therefore, implicit in the scheme of the Second Directive that the victim must be able to establish that the driver is liable to him in respect of his injuries, but whether that requires proof of fault will depend on the law of the country in which the accident occurred. The reference in regulation 13(1)(c)(ii) to an insurance undertaking which insures the use of the vehicle assumes the existence of a liability on the part of the driver which ought to be, but is not, covered by insurance. It follows, in my view, that the obligation imposed on the bureau by regulation 13(2)(b) to compensate the injured party in accordance with the provisions of article 1 of the Second Directive carries with it the implicit proviso that the injured party must be able to show that the driver is liable to him. As in the case of a claim under regulation 12, that is a question to be determined by reference to the applicable law identified in accordance with the appropriate conflicts of laws rules. At the time the 2003 Regulations were made the applicable rules were those of the Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995, but since the introduction of Rome II, the rules set out in that Regulation will apply and will normally lead to the application of the law of the country in which the accident occurred.’

Judges:

Laws, Moore-Bick, Rimer LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 1208, [2011] 1 WLR 2609, [2011] 1 All ER 844, [2011] 1 All ER (Comm) 445, [2011] RTR 2

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003, Regulation EEC No. 864/2007

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau QBD 16-Feb-2010
The UK claimant was seriously injured in Spain. The negligent car driver was not insured. The parties now disputed which law would apply in assessing the damages payable by the defendant. . .

Cited by:

Overruled – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau SC 3-Aug-2016
The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of . .
Followed – Bloy v Motor Insurers’ Bureau CA 29-Nov-2013
. .
Cited – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau QBD 17-Apr-2015
The claimant suffered injury in a road traffic accident in Greece. The responsible driver was uninsured. She claimed here under the MIB scheme, and the court was now asked whether Greek or UK law governed the assessment of damages.
Held: The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, European

Updated: 17 June 2022; Ref: scu.425585

British Transport Commission v Gourley: HL 1955

It is a universal rule that the plaintiff cannot recover more than he has lost and that realities must be considered rather than technicalities. The damages to be awarded for personal injury including loss of earnings should reflect the fact that tax would have been payable on those earnings in a case where the damages would not be taxable in the hands of the recipient.
The plaintiff was awarded damages after being injured in a rail crash. In calculating damages for loss of earnings, the judge did not deduct from the plaintiff’s gross lost earnings the sums he would have had to have paid for income tax etc.
Held: The defendant’s appeal succeeded. Income tax and other deductions are to be taken into account in assessing both past and future loss of earnings in claims for damages for personal injuries.
Earl Jowitt said: ‘The broad general principle which should govern the assessment of damages in cases such as this is that the tribunal should award the injured party such a sum of money as will put him in the same position as he would have been in if he had not sustained the injuries (see per LORD BLACKBURN in Livingstone v. Rawyards Coal Co.) . . The principle can . . afford some guidance to the tribunal in assessing compensation for the financial loss resulting from an accident, and in such cases it has been referred to as ‘the dominant rule of law’ (see per Lord Wright in Liesbosch (Dredger) v. Steamship Edison (Owners), The Edison). There are, no doubt, instances to be found in the books of exceptional cases in which this dominant rule does not apply, as, for instance, in cases of insurance, or cases calling for exemplary or punitive damages, or in certain cases dealing with the loss of use of a chattel. But, as Lord Sumner said in Admiralty Comrs. v. Chekiang (Woners), The Chekiang: ‘The measure of damages ought never to be governed by mere rules of practice, nor can such rules override the principles of the law on this subject’.’
Lord Jowitt said that the award should be realistic so as properly to make god the plaintiff’s loss: ‘I agree with Lord Sorn in thinking that to ignore the tax element at the present day would be to act in a manner which is out of touch with reality. Nor can I regard the tax element as so remote that it should be disregarded in assessing damages… I see no reason why in this case we should depart from the dominant rule, or why the respondent should not have his damages assessed on the basis of what he has really lost; and I consider that, in determining what he has really lost, the judge ought to have considered the tax liability of the respondent.’ Lord Jowitt did not accept that the tax element should be disregarded to avoid benefitting the wrongdoer: ‘My Lords, It is, I think, if I may say so with the utmost respect, fallacious to consider the problem as though a benefit were being conferred on a wrongdoer by allowing him to abate the damages for which he would otherwise be liable. The problem is rather for what damages is he liable; and, if we apply the dominant rule, we should answer, ‘He is liable for such damages as, by reason of his wrongdoing, the plaintiff has sustained’.’
Lord Reid: ‘In considering the importance of practical difficulties, I would weigh them against the importance of the element of tax liability, with tax at modern levels, in determining the real loss which the plaintiff has suffered.’

Judges:

Earl Jowitt, Lord Goddard, Lord Reid, Lord Radcliffe, Lord Tucker, Lord Jeith, Lord Somervell

Citations:

[1956] AC 185, [1955] UKHL 4, [1955] 3 All ER 796, [1956] 2 WLR 41

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Explained – Parry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .
Cited – Geoffrey Chatwin v Janice Lowther CA 21-May-2003
The case concerned the meaning of the phrase ‘compensation for earnings lost’ as it applied to self employed persons.
Held: The fact that a person’s accounts described fees as turnover, did not prevent them being still earnings within the Act. . .
Explained – Phipps v Orthodox Unit Trusts Limited CA 1958
The court discussed the case of BTC v Gourley: ‘Since that decision (i.e. Gourley) it has been established that where a claim is made for damages, whether for personal injuries or for wrongful dismissal, the income tax and surtax liability of the . .
Cited – West Suffolk County Council v W Rought Ltd HL 1957
The principle in Gourley v BTC was applicable to compensation for the compulsory acquisition of land used in a trade or business in a case where it was accepted that the compensation would not be taxable in the owner’s hands. . .
Cited – Parry v Cleaver CA 9-May-1967
The plaintiff policeman was hit by a car whilst he was on traffic duty. When he claimed damages in negligence the defendant sought to have deducted from his award an amount received by way of additional pension payments received which had been . .
Cited – Browning v War Office CA 1962
The plaintiff had been a technical sergeant in the United States Air Force; his pay had been $450 per month and after his injuries caused by the negligence of the defendants’ driver he received only a ‘veteran’s benefit’ of $217 per month
Cited – Metropolitan Police District Receiver v Croydon Corporation 1957
Where an employer is under a statutory obligation to pay wages whether the employee is fit for duty or not, the law is that the employee has suffered no loss and can recover no damages, and where the plaintiff continues to be paid these sums, they . .
Cited – O’Brien and others v Independent Assessor HL 14-Mar-2007
The claimants had been wrongly imprisoned for a murder they did not commit. The assessor had deducted from their compensation a sum to represent the living costs they would have incurred if living freely. They also appealed differences from a . .
Cited – Cheltenham Borough Council v Laird QBD 15-Jun-2009
The council sought damages saying that their former chief executive had not disclosed her history of depressive illness when applying for her job.
Held: The replies were not dishonest as the form could have been misconstrued. The claim failed. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Leading Case

Updated: 16 June 2022; Ref: scu.181849

Spence v Wilson and Others (No 2): OHCS 18 May 1998

When calculating interest on the loss of a primary family wage, the court was not to deduct benefits from such payments, and interest can be included in the total to be offset against his own liability to repay benefits.

Citations:

Times 18-May-1998

Statutes:

Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.89452

M’Kinlay v Darngavil Coal Co, Ltd: HL 25 Jan 1923

A father brought an action against a colliery company for damages for the death of his son aged nine, who while playing about a gate at the entrance to the colliery was fatally injured owing to the gate, on which other children were swinging, closing and crushing him between the hinge-end of the gate and the gate-post. The pursuer averred that the gate was so constructed that the space between the hinge-end of the gate and the gate-post varied from about one inch when the gate was closed to about one foot when it was open; that the gate when open was in the knowledge of the defenders dangerous owing to its size, construction, and weight; that it was in a state of disrepair, which prevented it from being secured when open by a device which the defenders had provided for that purpose; that children habitually played with the gate with the tacit permission of the defenders; that it formed an allurement which was of the nature of a trap; and that the defenders had taken no precautions to prevent children being injured. Held (aff. judgment of the First Division) that the pursuer had stated a relevant case for inquiry, and that accordingly the case must go to trial.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor, Lord Dunedin, Lord Shaw, Lord Buckmaster, and Lord Carson

Citations:

[1923] UKHL 440, 60 SLR 440

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury

Updated: 14 June 2022; Ref: scu.633255

M’Intosh v Arden Coal Co Ltd: HL 3 Apr 1924

A miner who was working with two shot-firers in driving a stone mine in a pit retired with them, after two shots had been lit, to a place of safety. One of the shots missed fire, and the miner, in breach of a notice issued by the employers which he had read, and which, after referring to the Explosives in Coal Mines Order of 1st September 1913, provided that if a shot missed fire no person should on any pretext approach the shot-hole before the expiry of the period mentioned in the Order, returned to the shot-hole within the prohibited time and was injured by an explosion.
Held aff. the judgment of the First Division) that the miner was not acting within the sphere of his employment at the time of the accident, and appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Viscount Cave, Viscount Finlay, Lord Dunedin, Lord Shaw, and Lord Sumner

Citations:

[1924] UKHL 478, 61 SLR 478

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.631557

Woodielee Coal and Coke Co, Ltd v Robertson: HL 22 Mar 1920

In a fiery mine, a miner, at the customary knock-off in the middle of the shift, struck a match to light a pipe. An explosion occurred and he received injuries from which he died. It was, as he knew, an offence under the Coal Mines Regulation Act 1911 to light or to be in possession of a match. Held that the miner’s injuries were not ‘arising out of’ the employment but out of an added peril, and consequently that his dependants could not recover compensation.

Judges:

Viscount Finlay, Viscount Cave, and Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, and Moulton

Citations:

[1920] UKHL 343, 57 SLR 343

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.631516

Abram Coal Co v Southern: HL 29 Jun 1903

The word ‘earnings’ in the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897 is used in a popular sense, and means the sum which a workman gets for his work when he comes to it properly equipped according to the general understanding and practice of his particular trade.
By agreement with a collier, his employer deducted from his weekly wages a sum for the check weigh fund, the sharpening of picks, and the maintenance of lamps, and the supply of oil thereto.
Held that in estimating the compensation due for an injury under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897, the workmen’s earnings were his whole wages without any deduction

Judges:

Lords Macnaghten, Shand, and Lindley

Citations:

[1903] UKHL 449, 41 SLR 449

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.630579

Connell v James Nimmo and Co Ltd: HL 21 Mar 1924

Held (aff. the judgment of the First Division, Lords Phillimore and Blanesburgh diss.) that an accumulation of inflammable gas in the workings of a ‘gassy’ mine, which the ventilating system had failed to dilute and render harmless, and which had not been detected owing to the negligence of the person entrusted by his employer with the duty of seeing that the works and ways were in a proper condition, constituted a defect in the condition of the ways and works of the mine within the meaning of section 1, sub-section (1) of the Employers’ Liability Act 1880.

Judges:

Lord Dunedin, Lord Atkinson, Lord Shaw, Lord Phillimore, and Lord Blanesburgh

Citations:

[1924] UKHL 467, 61 SLR 467

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.631553

Busby v Berkshire Bed Company Litd: QBD 9 Nov 2018

Claim for serious personal injury against bed seller after suffering damage to back on falling from bed whilst having sex.
Held: The claim failed: ‘the fact of an accident, without more, does not prove that its occurrence should not be considered as too remote. . . it required a most unfortunate and unusual combination of positioning on the bed and movement of the body for the difference in level to cause or materially contribute to a person falling off or out of the bed. I do not believe that would have been foreseeable by, or in the contemplation of, any reasonable person prior to the incident. Put simply it would have been extremely difficult for anyone to have thought of a mechanism whereby what was undoubtedly a problem with the bed, could lead to a person falling off/out of bed. I’

Judges:

Cotter QC HHJ

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2976 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Consumer, Personal Injury

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.628905

White (Widow and Administratrix of the Estate of David Charles White Deceased) v Esab Group (UK) Ltd: QBD 11 Oct 2001

Judges:

Nelson J

Citations:

[2001] EWHC QB 453

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Knauer v Ministry of Justice SC 24-Feb-2016
The court was asked: ‘whether the current approach to assessing the financial losses suffered by the dependant of a person who is wrongfully killed properly reflects the fundamental principle of full compensation, and if it does not whether we . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201650

Afrika and others v Cape Plc and others; X Y Z and Others v Schering health Care Ltd; Sayers and Others v Merck, Smithkline Beecham plc MMR/MR vaccine litigation: CA 21 Dec 2001

Claimants sought damages for personal injuries after immunisation with the MMR vaccine.

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 2027

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Davies v Eli Lilly and Co (Opren Litigation) CA 1987
The powers in the section together with the power to make orders for costs under Order 62 of the Rules of the Supreme Court included the power to make a pre-emptive order for costs.
Lord Donaldson MR said: ‘In these circumstances the judge . .

Cited by:

See Also – Sayers and Others v Smith Kline Beecham plc and Others; X, Y, Z and Others v Schering Health Care Ltd and Others; Afrika and Others v Cape plc CA 21-Dec-2001
The case concerned the management of substantial multi-party actions, and in particular the form of costs orders. The claimants sought a payment of the ‘common costs’ element to be made payable as the appropriate relative common issues were . .
See Also – XYZ and others v Schering Health QBD 29-Jul-2002
The court heard seven lead claims in group litigation against three drug companies in respect of their combined oral contraceptive products. . .
See Also – XYZ v Schering Health Care: Oral Contraceptive Litigation SCCO 31-Mar-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 13 June 2022; Ref: scu.201544

Corbett v Barking Havering and Brentwood Health Authority: CA 1991

The Claimant was a child who would have been dependant on his deceased young mother only until adulthood. When the trial took place the infant Plaintiff was 11.5 with a dependency until the age of 18. As the multiplier calculated as at the date of death was 12 there was only one half of a year left for the future dependency.
Held: The Court was bound by the date of death calculation rule even though the multiplier was effected primarily by the Claimant’s needs. ‘The power to deprive a tardy litigant of interest when he is guilty of unjustifiable delay is an essential discipline.’
The court was asked as to the quantification of damages for a child after the death of his mother in giving birth to him.

Judges:

Farquharson LJ, Lord Justice Ralph Gibson

Citations:

[1991] 2 QB 408, [1990] EWCA Civ 15

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1976 3(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Eagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
Cited – Coulson v Newsgroup Newspapers Ltd QBD 21-Dec-2011
The claimant had been employed by the defendant as editor of a newspaper. On leaving they entered into an agreement which the claimant said required the defendant to pay his legal costs in any action arising regarding his editorship. The defendant . .
Cited – Knauer v Ministry of Justice SC 24-Feb-2016
The court was asked: ‘whether the current approach to assessing the financial losses suffered by the dependant of a person who is wrongfully killed properly reflects the fundamental principle of full compensation, and if it does not whether we . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.200641

Thain (Ap) v Fisher Services (Aberfeldy) Limited: SCS 2 Oct 2001

The pursuer sought damages from an injury suffered duping the course of his employment. He particularly asserted that though he had not been part of a company pension, he had now lost the financial ability to make his own contributions to his personal pension. The defenders said this was a duplicate claim, and that there were insufficient averments to allow them to prepare an answer. The court held that the claim was not unarguable and should be allowed to proceed.

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 223, [2001] ScotHC 106

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.166270

Evans and Co Ltd v Astley: HL 21 Jul 1911

A brakesman was in charge of a train of three trucks pushed by an engine from behind, and was in the front truck. The train overtook on the same line a brakesvan drawn by another engine, and the two trains proceeded together, buffer to buffer, but uncoupled. After passing a certain point it was necessary for the trains to stop and then proceed in the reverse direction down a branch line, and it was the duty of a brakesman to alight and hold the points of the branch line by a lever. The brakesman in the truck, before the train stopped, tried to climb into the brakesvan, but in doing so fell and was fatally injured. It was not necessary to alight from the train while moving, and the ordinary method was for the brakesman to descend from the truck in which he was travelling. The brakesvan, however, was provided with a step closer to the ground than the buffer of the truck. The dependants of the brakesman successfully claimed compensation against his employers.
Held (diss. Lord Atkinson) that there was evidence upon which the County Court Judge might find in fact that the accident arose out of and in the course of the employment.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Atkinson, Gorell, and Robson

Citations:

[1911] UKHL 675, 49 SLR 675

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.619209

Orrell Colliery Co Ltd v Schofield: HL 14 May 1909

A workman was killed by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. At the date of his death he was engaged to be married; the banns had been published at his expense and the wedding day fixed; the woman was pregnant with a child which the workman had acknowledged to be his own and intended to maintain.
Held that the after-born illegitimate child was a dependant under sec. 13 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906. The claim of a posthumous illegitimate child for compensation as a dependant of a deceased workman was sustained by the County Court Judge and affirmed by the Court of Appeal

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Ashbourne, James of Hereford, Gorell and Shaw

Citations:

[1909] UKHL 1043, 46 SLR 1043

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.620580

Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau: QBD 23 Apr 2015

Application for leave to appeal – granted

Judges:

Gilbart J

Citations:

[2015] EWHC 1142 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

dministration of Justice Act 1969 12

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau QBD 17-Apr-2015
The claimant suffered injury in a road traffic accident in Greece. The responsible driver was uninsured. She claimed here under the MIB scheme, and the court was now asked whether Greek or UK law governed the assessment of damages.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Leave – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau SC 3-Aug-2016
The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.545918

Pearson v Anwar: CA 22 Jul 2015

Application by the Claimant for permission to appeal against the decision that the damages recoverable by the Claimant should be reduced by 25 per cent as a result of his contributory negligence.

Citations:

[2015] EWCA Civ 1011

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.553284

Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau: QBD 17 Apr 2015

The claimant suffered injury in a road traffic accident in Greece. The responsible driver was uninsured. She claimed here under the MIB scheme, and the court was now asked whether Greek or UK law governed the assessment of damages.
Held: The assessment of compensation for the claimant was to be on the basis of the law of England and Wales.

Judges:

Gilbart J

Citations:

[2015] WLR(D) 177, [2015] EWHC 1002 (QB)

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

Motor Vehicles (Compulsory Insurance) (Information Centre and Compensation Body) Regulations 2003

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jacobs v Motor Insurers Bureau CA 27-Oct-2010
The claimant was injured when struck by a car in Spain, driven by an uninsured driver. He claimed here against the MIB. The 2003 Regulations under which he claimed had not been updated for the 2007 EU Regulations. The parties disputed which law . .

Cited by:

See Also – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau QBD 23-Apr-2015
Application for leave to appeal – granted . .
At First Instance – Moreno v The Motor Insurers’ Bureau SC 3-Aug-2016
The claimant had been severely injured when hit by a car in Greece. The car’s driver was uninsured. The Court was now asked whether the scope of her claim to damages was to be determined in accordance with English or Greek law. The implementation of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, European

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.545605

Gill v Donald Humberstone and Co Ltd: HL 1963

When interpreting delegated legislation, the Court ought be concerned with practical considerations rather than construing it by meticulous comparison of the language of the various provisions such as might be appropriate in construing sections of an Act of Parliament and that if the language is capable of more than one interpretation, a court ought discard the more natural meaning if it leads to an unreasonable, result, and adopt that interpretation which leads to a reasonably practical result.
Lord Reid said: ‘I find it necessary to make some general observations about the interpretation of regulations of this kind. They are addressed to practical people skilled in the particular trade or industry . . They have often evolved by stages as in the present case, and as a result they often exhibit minor inconsistencies, overlapping and gaps. So they ought to be construed in light of practical considerations, rather than by a meticulous comparison of the language of their various provisions, such as might be appropriate in construing sections of an Act of Parliament . . difficulties cannot always be foreseen, and it may happen that in a particular case the requirements of a regulation are unreasonable or impracticable; but, if the language is capable of more than one interpretation, we ought to discard the more natural meaning if it leads to an unreasonable result, and adopt that interpretation which leads to a reasonably practicable result.’

Judges:

Lord Reid

Citations:

[1963] 1 WLR 929, [1963] 3 All ER 180

Statutes:

Factories Act 1937

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Construction

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.535596

Smith v Youth Justice Board for England and Wales and Another: CA 16 Feb 2010

The claimant worked as a training assistant at a secure training centre. After she used a recommended restraint method on a child, the child died, and she had herself become unable to continue to work. She claimed liability in the recommendation of an unsafe forcible restraint method. She appealed against rejection of her claim on the grounds that she had not in fact used the recommended method, and had persisted despite recommendations in the guidance to desist if it became unsafe.
Held: The respondent had known that the technique needed review, and had failed to do so. The claimant’s failure was not in misapplying the technique but in its excess use.
Had the respondent caused the injury? Causation in negligence claims is one of fairness. Though the respondent was at fault, it could not be said that that fault contributed to the damage suffered by the claimant. The appeal failed.

Judges:

Laws, Patten Sedley LJJ

Citations:

[2010] EWCA Civ 99

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Prisons, Negligence

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.400995

A v B Hospitals NHS Trust: Admn 10 Nov 2006

The claimant baby had suffered catastrophic injuries at birth in the defendant’s hospital. Liability having been admitted, the court now considered whether damages should be paid as a lump sum or by periodical payments.
Held: ‘ the form of award which best meets this Claimant’s needs in respect of the provision of future care is a lump sum award. For the reasons set out above I consider that it is most unlikely that periodical payments linked to RPI will meet the future care costs in this case. On the contrary, I consider that there is a very strong probability that divergence between RPI and the actual cost of the provision of care will result in a massive shortfall of provision. By contrast, I consider that there is, realistically, a good prospect of meeting actual care costs from the lump sum award. ‘

Judges:

Lloyd Jones J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2833 (Admin), (2007) 95 BMLR 240, [2007] LS Law Medical 303

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996 2 2A

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co HL 13-Feb-1880
Damages or removal of coal under land
User damages were awarded for the unauthorised removal of coal from beneath the appellant’s land, even though the site was too small for the appellant to have mined the coal himself. The appellant was also awarded damages for the damage done to the . .
Cited – Wells v Wells; Thomas v Brighton Health Authority; etc HL 16-Jul-1998
In each of three cases, the plaintiffs had suffered serious injury. They complained that the court had made a substantial reduction of their damages award for loss of future earnings and the costs of future care.
Held: The appeals succeeded. . .
Cited – Flora v Wakom (Heathrow) Ltd CA 28-Jul-2006
The claimant was severely injured and claimed for loss of future earnings and future care. The defendant admitted liability. In the statement of case for damages, the claimant contended that, if the court made an order for periodic payments, it . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.376257

Home Office v Lowles: CA 29 Jul 2004

The defendant appealed against finding of liability. The claimant, an officer ar Armley Prison had been redirected to a side entrance. There was a ramp, but at the top was a two inch step. The parties had disputed the exact circumstances of the fall.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘The Recorder approached regulation 12(3) by saying simply that he was satisfied that the threshold constituted an obstruction, and that it was therefore for the Home Office to satisfy him that it was not reasonably practicable to avoid or remove the threshold, which it had not attempted to do. I consider, as I have said, that the question whether there was an obstruction which ‘may’ cause a person to slip, trip or fall is one which itself involves a balancing of relevant factors relating to the nature and extent of any risk for persons using the floor or traffic route. But the Recorder had already considered such factors in making his assessment under regulation 12(1), and in the light of that assessment I do not think that he can, on the facts of this case, be criticised for proceeding straightaway to a conclusion that there was a relevant obstruction for the purposes of regulation 12(3). I do not see any reason why the unexpected threshold, constituting a step of unusual intermediate height at the top of a ramp, for which there was no apparent reason, should not in law be regarded as an obstruction in the floor or the surface of the traffic route.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 985

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 SI No. 3004, Directive 89/654/EEC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Marks and Spencer plc v Palmer CA 9-Oct-2001
A shopper carrying some heavy bags tripped and fell over a weather strip, which was proud of the floor at an exit door to the extent of some 8 to 9.5 mm high. The recorder had said that, once he was satisfied that the claimant came into contact with . .
Cited – Assicurazioni Generali Spa v Arab Insurance Group (BSC) CA 13-Nov-2002
Rehearing/Review – Little Difference on Appeal
The appellant asked the Court to reverse a decision on the facts reached in the lower court.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority decision). The court’s approach should be the same whether the case was dealt with as a rehearing or as a review. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199736

Fiona Thompson v Hampshire County Council: CA 27 Jul 2004

The claimant fell into a ditch by a path on the highway in the dark. She appealed a finding of no liability on the highway authority.
Held: The authority’s responsibility was as to the surface structures of the road way and not as to the layout.

Judges:

Potter, Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1016, Times 14-Oct-2004

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council HL 1-Apr-2004
Statutory Duty Not Extended by Common Law
The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down.
Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include . .
Cited – Goodes v East Sussex County Council HL 16-Jun-2000
The claimant was driving along a road. He skidded on ice, crashed and was severely injured. He claimed damages saying that the Highway authority had failed to ‘maintain’ the road.
Held: The statutory duty on a highway authority to keep a road . .

Cited by:

Cited – Department for Transport, Environment and the Regions v Mott Macdonald Ltd and others CA 27-Jul-2006
Claims arose from accidents caused by standing water on roadway surfaces after drains had not been cleared by the defendants over a long period of time. The Department appealed a decision giving it responsibility under a breach of statutory duty . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.199571

Hammond v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis and others: CA 11 Jun 2004

The claimant mechanic was employed by the Commissioner of Police. He was working on the wheel of a police dog van when the shearing of a wheel bolt caused him to suffer injury. The question was whether the van was ‘work equipment’ within the meaning of the 1992 regulations, which defined ‘work equipment’: ‘any machinery, appliance, apparatus or tool and any assembly of components which, in order to achieve a common end, are arranged and controlled so that they function as a whole.’ The scope of the duty is defined by regulation 4(1): ‘The requirements imposed by these Regulations on an employer shall apply in respect of work equipment provided for use or used by any of his employees who is at work.’
Held: May LJ said: ‘Although the definition of what may be work equipment is to be found in regulation 2, the ambit of the expression ‘work equipment’ in these Regulations is determined by regulation 4 . . This indicates . . that the Regulations are concerned with what may loosely be described as the tools of the trade provided by an employer to an employee to enable the employee to carry out his work . . The van might well be work equipment of a policeman driving it, but not of the police mechanic repairing it.’

Judges:

May LJ

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 830, [2004] ICR 1467

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Not approved – Spencer-Franks v Kellogg Brown and Root Ltd and others HL 2-Jul-2008
The deceased worked for the defendants on an oil rig. He was injured by a door closer he was attempting to repair. The defendants denied that the mechanism was equipment within the Regulations.
Held: The appeal was allowed. The door closer was . .
Cited – Smith v Northamptonshire County Council HL 20-May-2009
The claimant, a health care worker was visiting the home of a client when she fell from a defective wheelchair ramp and suffered injury. She sought damages from her employer.
Held: Her appeal failed (Lord Hope and Lady Hale dissenting). The . .
Cited – Abdul and Others v Director of Public Prosecutions Admn 16-Feb-2011
The defendants appealed against convictions for using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour or disorderly behaviour . . within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress. He had attended a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198499

Stevens (Through her Mother and Litigation Friend) v County Borough of Blaenau Gwent: CA 17 Jun 2004

The mother of the claimant had complained to the local authority landlord about the absence of locks on her windows. The council replied that such locks could themselves be a hazard, and did not install a lock. The claimant climbed through and fell from a balcony and suffered injury.
Held: In view of the Admas case, the policy was understandable. There was no general duty to supply child proof locks.

Judges:

Potter, Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Bodey Lord Justice Carnwath

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 715, Times 29-Jun-2004

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Cavalier v Pope HL 22-Jun-1906
The wife of the tenant of a house let unfurnished sought to recover from the landlord damages for personal injuries arising from the non-repair of the house, on the ground that the landlord had contracted with her husband to repair the house.
Cited – Stockley v Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council CA 1986
A council owned a two-storey building divided into four flats, one of which was occupied by the plaintiff. It failed to prevent frozen water pipes in the roof of the building (which was outside the demise to the plaintiff) from bursting and flooding . .
Cited – Adams and Another v Rhymney Valley District Council CA 3-Aug-2000
The landlord housing authority replaced windows with double glazing with locks on the windows with removable keys. Two children died in a fire in the house being unable to escape through the windows. The authority was not liable in negligence. They . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Housing, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198313

Blake v Galloway: CA 25 Jun 2004

The claimant was injured whilst playing about with other members of his band throwing sticks at each other. The defendant appealed against a denial of his defence on non fit injuria.
Held: The horseplay in which the five youths were engaged was not a regulated sport or game played according to explicit rules, nor was it organised in any formal sense. The offending blow was caused by a piece of bark which was thrown in accordance with the tacit understandings or conventions of the game. This was an unfortunate accident, and no more. There was no breach of the duty to take reasonable care.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke VC, The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 814, Times 19-Jul-2004, [2004] 1 WLR 2844, [2004] 3 All ER 315

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson HL 26-May-1932
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability
The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a . .
Cited – Condon v Basi CA 30-Apr-1985
The parties were playing football. The defendant executed a late dangerous and foul tackle on the plaintiff breaking his leg. The defendant was sent off, and the plaintiff sued.
Held: Those taking part in competitive sport still owed a duty of . .
Cited – Rootes v Shelton 1965
(High Court of Australia) Barwick CJ said: ‘By engaging in a sport or pastime the participants may be held to have accepted risks which are inherent in that sport or pastime: the tribunal of fact can make its own assessment of what the accepted . .
Cited – Wooldridge v Sumner CA 1963
A spectator was injured at a horse show.
Held: The court considered the defence of volenti non fit injuria: ‘The maxim in English law presupposes a tortious act by the defendant. The consent that is relevant is not consent to the risk of . .
Cited – Caldwell v Maguire and Fitzgerald CA 27-Jun-2001
The claimant, a professional jockey, had been injured when he was unseated as a result of manoeuvres by two fellow jockeys. At trial the judge identified five principles: ‘[1] Each contestant in a lawful sporting contest (and in particular a race) . .
Cited – Lane v Holloway CA 30-Jun-1967
In the context of a fight with fists, ordinarily neither party has a cause of action for any injury suffered during the fight. But they do not assume ‘the risk of a savage blow out of all proportion to the occasion. The man who strikes a blow of . .

Cited by:

Cited – Orchard v Lee CA 3-Apr-2009
The claimant appealed rejection of her claim for personal injuries. She was supervising a school playground, and was injured by a 13 year old child running backwards into her. She claimed against the boy. The judge found it to be mere horseplay.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198410

Donaldson v Wilson: CA 26 Jan 2004

The owner of cattle sought leave to appeal a finding of negligence in his having failed to maintain the fences on his property, which in turn allowed his cattle to stray into the road and cause an accident in which the claimant was severely injured. The judge found that there was a risk that walkers would fail to close any gate, and that the farmer should therefore have installed a self closing gate.
Held: Although the defendant’s appeal had little prospect of success, given the importance of the decision to farmers and insurers, the application for leave to appeal was granted subject to an indemnity to the claimant for his costs.

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 123

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Full Appeal – Wilson v Donaldson CA 9-Jul-2004
Cattle strayed from a field onto the road. A motorist was injured and claimed damages. The farmer appealed.
Held: the judge had been correct that the farmers should have recognised the risk, and taken simple and inexpensive steps to avoid the . .

Cited by:

Leave to Appeal – Wilson v Donaldson CA 9-Jul-2004
Cattle strayed from a field onto the road. A motorist was injured and claimed damages. The farmer appealed.
Held: the judge had been correct that the farmers should have recognised the risk, and taken simple and inexpensive steps to avoid the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.198195

Campbell v The University of Edinburgh: OHCS 4 May 2004

Judges:

R.F.Macdonald, Q.C.

Citations:

[2004] ScotCS 114

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Barber v Somerset County Council HL 1-Apr-2004
A teacher sought damages from his employer after suffering a work related stress breakdown.
Held: The definition of the work expected of him did not justify the demand placed upon him. The employer could have checked up on him during his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 11 June 2022; Ref: scu.197664

Lamoon v Fry: CA 29 Apr 2004

A collision occurred between a motor car and a cyclist. The driver appealed a finding that he had been driving too quickly, and that that was a cause of the accident. The claimant had cut across a right hand corner of the narrow unmarked lane. The lane had high hedges. The cyclist was 60% to blame.
Held: The appeal failed. Rix LJ said: ‘So far as causation is concerned, I am similarly satisfied that it is impossible to say that the judge was wrong to conclude that the excessive speed was a cause of the collision. I accept [the] submission that, albeit, as the judge found, the motorist was properly keeping to his side of the road while taking this bend, nevertheless on such a road he had to be aware of the possibility of other users of the road who may be at risk if he drove too fast for those conditions. At a slower speed, alive to that danger, he could well have avoided a collision, even if he could not have stopped within the distance. It was for the judge to assess that matter: he assessed it as probable, and I cannot say he was wrong to do so.’

Judges:

Rix LJ, Peter Gibson LJ, Longmore LJ

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 591

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Phethean-Hubble v Coles CA 21-Mar-2012
The claimant cyclist suffered serious injury in a collision with a car driven by the defendant. The defendant appealed against a finding that he was two thirds responsible. The case for the injured cyclist was that the motorist was going too fast. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Personal Injury

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.197045

Barker v Saint Gobain Pipelines Plc: CA 5 May 2004

Judges:

Lord Justice Keene Lord Justice Kay Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 545, [2005] 3 All ER 661

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – Barker v Corus (UK) Plc HL 3-May-2006
The claimants sought damages after contracting meselothemia working for the defendants. The defendants argued that the claimants had possibly contracted the disease at any one or more different places. The Fairchild case set up an exception to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.196625

Sleafer v Lambeth Borough Council: CA 1959

The plaintiff held a weekly residential tenancy of the defendant local authority. The front door was defective and jammed. The tenancy agreement contained a covenant by the tenant to keep the flat in good and tenantable repair. When the tenant pulled at the door it came off causing him injury as he fell. He claimed damages for personal injuries.
Held: The claim failed. There is no implied duty to repair a property on landlord, and no such implication could be based on the obligations on the part of the Lessee under a clause permitting the Lessor to view the property and to effect work necessary for upholding the building. Wilmer LJ observed: ‘I think there is much to be said for the view that Clause II of the Agreement, which requires a tenant to reside in the dwelling house, does by implication require the landlords to do such repairs as may make it possible for the tenant to carry out that obligation. At least it seems to me that that is a possible view.’

Judges:

Wilmer LJ

Citations:

[1959] 3 All ER 378, [1960] 1 QB 43

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Followed – Tennant Radiant Heat Ltd v Warrington Development Corporation 1988
A property comprised a large building let on fully repairing leases of 22 units. The many rain outlets were allowed to become blocked, and water accumulated above one unit before that part of the roof collapsed. The landlord appealed a finding that . .
Cited – Barrett v Lounova (1982) Ltd CA 1990
In a tenancy agreement for one year and thereafter from month to month, the tenant covenanted to do all the inside repairs and to leave the inside in good repair, order and condition at the expiry of the tenancy.
Held: The decision of the . .
Cited – Adami v Lincoln Grange Management Limited CA 17-Dec-1997
No General Duty on Landlord to Repair Structure
The plaintiff was a tenant of an apartment in a block. He appealed a ruling that there was no term implied into his lease imposing on the landlord a duty to maintain the structure of the building. The lease contained service charge provisions, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Landlord and Tenant, Personal Injury

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.194603

In re Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation: CA 3 Jul 2003

Passengers on air flights who had suffered deep vein thrombosis through inactivity whilst travelling sought damages.
Held: The claim in its nature was for something unrelated to any particular event. The word ‘accident’ necessitated some sort of event, an ‘unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger’ and a failure to warn of the danger could not itself be an accident. The Convention provided the exclusive jurisdiction for claims against carriers. The claim failed.

Judges:

Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Judg, Kay LJJ

Citations:

Times 14-Jul-2003, Gazette 18-Sep-2003

Statutes:

Warsaw Convention on International Carriage by Air 1929 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – In re Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation QBD 20-Dec-2002
The claimants claimed to have suffered deep vein thrombosis having been sat in cramped conditions for long periods whilst travelling by air. They sought compensation, saying that the failure by the airlines to warn them and take steps to minimise . .
See Also – Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation, Re CA 3-Jul-2002
Group litigation between the appellant passengers and the respondent carriers. Most of the passengers allege that they have suffered deep vein thrombosis leading to serious injury, as a result of travelling in the carriers’ aircraft. In some . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation HL 8-Dec-2005
The appellants had suffered deep vein thrombosis whilst travelling on long haul air flights. The defendants said that their liability was limited because the injuries were not accidents.
Held: The claimants’ appeal failed. The definition of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Transport

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.184545

Henderson v Jaouen and Another: CA 1 Feb 2002

The plaintiff had been injured in an accident and had sued and recovered damages for his injuries in France. Later, his condition deteriorated. In France he would have been able to revive his action to claim further damages, but he sought a similar right from an English Court, claiming a right to do so under the Act because the deterioration had occurred exclusively whilst he was in England. The defendant and his insurers appealed a refusal to strike out the claimant’s claim.
Held: The claim should be struck out. The harmful even required by the Convention had occurred in France. The Bier case was not on all fours and was to be interpreted restrictively.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Mantell and Mr Justice Wall

Citations:

Times 07-Mar-2002, Gazette 21-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 75

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Brussels Convention on Jurisdiction and the Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 1968 (Cmnd 7395), Civil Jurisdiction and Judgments Act 1982

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Handelskwekerij G. J. Bier BV v Mines de potasse d’Alsace SA ECJ 30-Nov-1976
Europa A discharge into the French part of the Rhine of saline waste caused alleged damage to the horticultural business of the first plaintiff, and to the waters of the Rhine in general in the Netherlands.

Cited by:

Cited – Cooley v Ramsey QBD 1-Feb-2008
The claimant sought damages after being severely injured in a road traffic accident in Australia caused by the defendant. The defendant denied that the court had jurisdiction to permit service out of the jurisdiction. The claimant said that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

International, Personal Injury, Damages, European, Road Traffic

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.167724

Heil v Rankin: CA 13 Jun 2000

Where supervening events might contribute to the personal injury suffered, the proper approach in apportioning compensation in respect of one occasion was in general terms to provide just and sufficient compensation for the injury caused without being excessive. There is no general or universal logical basis for rules in these situations. The possibility of hypothetical future injury should not be given any excess weight in assessing future losses of earnings.
Otton LJ observed that in Jobling, Lord Keith ‘was clear that the rule that he formulated, of ignoring the occurrence of a second tort when awarding damages against a first tortfeasor, could not be justified on any identifiable juristic basis, but rather was a just and practical solution to avoid the barrier to full compensation that would arise if the normal rules were applied to their full extent’.

Judges:

Otton LJ

Citations:

Times 20-Jun-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 187, [2001] QB 272, [2001] PIQR Q3, [2000] 2 WLR 1173, [2000] Lloyd’s Rep Med 203, [2000] 3 All ER 138, [2000] IRLR 334

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Heil v Rankin, Rees v Mabco (102) Ltd, Schofield v Saunders and Taylor Ltd and Other cases CA 23-Mar-2000
The Law Commission had recommended that the general level of damages awarded for pain suffering and loss of amenity in personal injury cases should be raised. The Court now considered several cases on the issue.
Held: The court would do so. . .
Distinguished – Chapman v Hearse, Baker v Willoughby HL 26-Nov-1969
The plaintiff, a pedestrian had been struck by the defendant’s car while crossing the road. The plaintiff had negligently failed to see the defendant’s car approaching. The defendant had a clear view of the plaintiff prior to the collision, but was . .
Cited – Jobling v Associated Dairies HL 1980
The claimant suffered an accident at work which left him with continuing disabling back pain. Before the trial of his claim he was diagnosed as suffering from a disease, in no way connected with the accident, which would in any event have wholly . .
Cited – Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co HL 13-Feb-1880
Damages or removal of coal under land
User damages were awarded for the unauthorised removal of coal from beneath the appellant’s land, even though the site was too small for the appellant to have mined the coal himself. The appellant was also awarded damages for the damage done to the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Lawson v Glaves-Smith, Executor of the Estate of Dawes (Deceased) QBD 14-Nov-2006
The claimant sought damages saying that she had been falsely imprisoned, raped and drugged by the defendant who had since died.
Held: The court had only the evidence of the claimant, and must be careful in examining it. On that evidence the . .
Cited – Vento v The Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police (No 2) CA 20-Dec-2002
The claimant had been awarded damages for sex discrimination, including a sum of andpound;25,000 for injury to feelings. The respondent appealed.
Held: The Court of Appeal looked to see whether there had been an error of law in the employment . .
Cited – Soutzos v Asombang and Others ChD 21-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained a freezing order against the defendants. His claim having been dismissed, the court now considered if and what damages should be paid under the cross-undertaking he had given.
Held: Setting out and applying the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.147220

Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board: HL 5 Jul 2001

When calculating the losses suffered by a victim of crime, the allowance to be made for losses to a retirement pension through having to retire early should have set off against them, the benefits received by way of payments for his ill-health, which payments he would not have received but for the incident. The section did not apply to prohibit from inclusion a calculation where the claim itself was for a loss to his contractual pension. The section should be applied so far as the nature of the benefit which was in issue was relevant to the assessment of that head of damages.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Steyn Lord Hope of Craighead Lord Hobhouse of Wood-borough Lord Scott of Foscote

Citations:

Times 16-Jul-2001, [2001] UKHL 36, 2001 GWD 24-879, 2001 SLT 966, 2002 SCLR 185, 2002 SC (HL) 1

Links:

Bailii, House of Lords

Statutes:

Administration of Justice Act 1982 10

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Appeal from – Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board IHCS 9-Feb-2000
The petitioner appealed a refusal of his claim for compensation. He was a serving police officer injured whilst arresting an offender. He had retired on medical grounds and received pensions, which the Board found deductible from any award reducing . .
Cited – Parry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .
Cited – Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co HL 13-Feb-1880
Damages or removal of coal under land
User damages were awarded for the unauthorised removal of coal from beneath the appellant’s land, even though the site was too small for the appellant to have mined the coal himself. The appellant was also awarded damages for the damage done to the . .
Cited – Paff v Speed 6-Apr-1961
(High Court of Australia) ‘The first consideration is what is the nature of the loss or damage which the plaintiff says he has suffered.’
Damages – Personal injuries – Matters to be considered in reduction of damages – Plaintiff policeman at . .
Cited – Longden v British Coal Corporation HL 13-Mar-1997
The plaintiff was injured whilst at work in one of the defendant’s collieries. The House considered the deductibility from damages awarded for personal injury of a collateral benefit.
Held: The issue of deductibility where the claim is for . .
Cited – Auty v National Coal Board CA 1985
A widow received a widow’s pension under a Coal Board scheme on the death of her husband, which had been caused by the defendants’ negligence.
Held: She did not have to give credit for this pension when the value of her dependency on her . .
Cited – Wilson v National Coal Board HL 1981
A entire colliery closed down and all employees other than the pursuer were offered and accepted alternative employment, thus disqualifying them from receiving redundancy payments. The pursuer, who had been injured by the accident for which the . .
Cited – John Leebody v Gordon Liddle SCS 31-Mar-2000
The pursuer’s claim for damages also included a claim for loss of pension rights. The amount of the difference between the pension which the pursuer would have received under his employers’ pension scheme had he retired at the age of 65 and the . .
Approved – John Leebody v Gordon Liddle SCS 31-Mar-2000
The pursuer’s claim for damages also included a claim for loss of pension rights. The amount of the difference between the pension which the pursuer would have received under his employers’ pension scheme had he retired at the age of 65 and the . .
Cited – Davidson v Upper Clyde Shipbuilders 1990
The pursuer could make no claim for loss of pension rights for the period after which she would have become entitled to a widow’s pension in her own right after her husband’s death. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board IHCS 9-Feb-2000
The petitioner appealed a refusal of his claim for compensation. He was a serving police officer injured whilst arresting an offender. He had retired on medical grounds and received pensions, which the Board found deductible from any award reducing . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.162830

Merseyside Police Authority, Regina (on the Application Of) v Gidlow and Another: Admn 8 Dec 2004

Whether a police officer’s diagnosed adjustment disorder or mixed anxiety/depression was ‘an injury received in the execution of his duty as a police constable’ within the meaning of the regulations.

Judges:

Mr Justice Stanley Burnton

Citations:

[2004] EWHC 2807 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Pensions Regulations 1987 H2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Police, Personal Injury

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.220127

Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police: CA 7 Apr 2004

The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct line of causation between the known faults in the equipment, and the failure to operate a safe system of work, and the stroke. The court had erred in applying Sutherland v Hatton, and should have considered whether the claimant was a primary or secondary victim. He was a primary victim. The injury was foreseeable and the appeal was allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Auld Lord Justice Latham Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 405

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Sutherland v Hatton; Barber v Somerset County Council and similar CA 5-Feb-2002
Defendant employers appealed findings of liability for personal injuries consisting of an employee’s psychiatric illness caused by stress at work.
Held: Employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees. There are . .
Cited – Barber v Somerset County Council HL 1-Apr-2004
A teacher sought damages from his employer after suffering a work related stress breakdown.
Held: The definition of the work expected of him did not justify the demand placed upon him. The employer could have checked up on him during his . .
Cited – Page v Smith HL 12-May-1995
The plaintiff was driving his car when the defendant turned into his path. Both cars suffered considerable damage but the drivers escaped physical injury. The Plaintiff had a pre-existing chronic fatigue syndrome, which manifested itself from time . .
Cited – Young v Charles Church (Southern) Ltd CA 24-Apr-1997
Presence within the range of foreseeable physical injury is a necessary attribute of a primary victim. . .
Cited – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police HL 28-Nov-1991
The plaintiffs sought damages for nervous shock. They had watched on television, as their relatives and friends, 96 in all, died at a football match, for the safety of which the defendants were responsible. The defendant police service had not . .
Cited – McFarlane v E E Caledonia Ltd CA 10-Sep-1993
The court will not extend a duty of care to mere bystanders of horrific events. Nor is any duty of care owed to a rescuer lacking ordinary courage. Whether a person is to be regarded as a rescuer will be a question of fact to be decided on the . .
Cited – Nobes, Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Schofield CA 14-May-1998
A police constable was entitled to claim damages for nervous shock after a co-officer unexpectedly and unlawfully fired off shots from a gun they had found as part of a search. . .
Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – Malcolm v Broadhurst QBD 1970
The principle of foreseeability of psychiatric injury is subject to the qualification that, where the psychiatric injury suffered by the plaintiff is consequential upon physical injury for which the defendant is responsible in law, the defendant . .
Cited – Sutherland v Hatton; Barber v Somerset County Council and similar CA 5-Feb-2002
Defendant employers appealed findings of liability for personal injuries consisting of an employee’s psychiatric illness caused by stress at work.
Held: Employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees. There are . .
Cited – Dulieu v White and Sons KBD 1901
A pregnant barmaid suffered nervous shock causing her to give premature birth as a result of the tortfeasor’s horse van bursting into her bar at the Bonner Arms in Bethnal Green from the roadway. The defendant pleaded that the damages claimed were . .
Cited – Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw HL 1-Mar-1956
The injury of which the employee complained came from two sources, a pneumatic hammer, in respect of which the employers were not in breach of the relevant Regulations; and swing grinders, in respect of which they were in breach.
Held: It had . .
Cited – McLoughlin v O’Brian HL 6-May-1982
The plaintiff was the mother of a child who died in an horrific accident, in which her husband and two other children were also injured. She was at home at the time of the accident, but went to the hospital immediately when she had heard what had . .
Cited – McGhee v National Coal Board HL 1973
The claimant who was used to emptying pipe kilns at a brickworks was sent to empty brick kilns where the working conditions were much hotter and dustier. His employers failed, in breach of their duty, to provide him with washing facilities after his . .
Cited – Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others HL 20-Jun-2002
The claimants suffered mesothelioma after contact with asbestos while at work. Their employers pointed to several employments which might have given rise to the condition, saying it could not be clear which particular employment gave rise to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 10 June 2022; Ref: scu.195491

Murray v Fife Coal Co Ltd: HL 4 Apr 1924

A miner whose duty it was to take hutches, when they were full, down an incline attempted to do so by placing himself in front of them in violation of an express verbal prohibition by his employers from guiding hutches downwards otherwise than from the side, with the result that he was fatally injured.
Held (rev. the judgment of the First Division, Viscount Finlay diss.) that the miner was not acting within the sphere of his employment at the time of the accident, and appeal allowed

Judges:

Viscount Cave, Viscount Finlay, Lord Dunedin, Lord Shaw, and Lord Sumner

Citations:

[1924] UKHL 479, 61 SLR 479

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.631558

Anslow v Cannock Chase Colliery Co Ltd: HL 17 May 1909

A workman was totally incapacitated by accident. During all the preceding year he had been employed by respondent company in the same grade of work. During this time there were 16 weeks when work was impossible through public holidays or stoppage of work. Out of the 36 working weeks the workman had been off work for 3 from sickness and private holiday. His total wages for the year earned in the 33 remaining weeks were pounds 68.
Held that stoppage of work and public holidays were normal incidents of the employment, and that therefore the workman’s average weekly earnings, in terms of the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906 (6 Edw. VII, c. 58), Sched. I, secs. 1, 2, were 36/52nd parts of the workman’s weekly earnings during the 33 weeks he had actually worked, i.e., 36/52nds of a 33rd part of pounds 68.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Ashbourne, Gorel, and Shaw

Citations:

[1909] UKHL 1043 – 1, 46 SLR 1043 – 1

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.620578

Ayr Steam Shipping Co Ltd v Lendrum: HL 17 Jul 1914

Circumstances in which held (diss. Lords Dunedin and Atkinson, and rev. judgment of the Second Division) that an award of compensation by an arbiter in a workmen’s compensation case, where the workman, a ship’s steward, was last seen alive in his bunk, and was found drowned next day near where his ship had been lying, should be sustained, inasmuch as a reasonable man might have drawn the inference that his death resulted from an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment.
Per Earl Loreburn, in a case under the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906-‘Where a case is stated incompletely or ambiguously a court may remit for further information. . . A remit is not intended to assist the court in substituting itself for the arbiter.’

Judges:

Earl Loreburn, Lords Dunedin, Atkinson, Shaw, and Parmoor

Citations:

[1914] UKHL 733, 51 SLR 733

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury

Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.620722

Laudanska v The University of Abertay: ScSf 4 Nov 2003

Judges:

J. Gordon Reid, QC

Citations:

[2003] ScotSC 54

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

Cited – Walker v Northumberland County Council QBD 16-Nov-1994
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.191105

Lambie v Toffolo Jackson Limited (In Liq) and Another: OHCS 11 Nov 2003

Judges:

Lord Macfadyen And Lord President And Lord Kirkwood

Citations:

[2003] ScotCS 282, 2003 SLT 1415

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SCS 8-Jan-2010
The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2009 Act by judicial review. The Act would make their insured and themselves liable to very substantial unanticipated claims for damages for pleural plaques which would not previousl or otherwise . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.190807

Morris v Murray: CA 3 Aug 1990

The plaintiff agreed to be flown by the defendant in his light aircraft though he knew the defendant was inebriated. The plaintiff drove the car which took them to the airfield and he helped to start and refuel the aircraft, which was piloted by the friend. Shortly after take-off the aircraft crashed, killing the pilot and severely injuring the plaintiff. At first instance the court found the defendant failed in his claim of non fit injuria, but the plaintiff succeeded in negligence.
Held: The defendant’s appeal was allowed. The defence of volenti non fit injuria applied, and the claim failed. The plaintiff willingly embarked upon the flight, knowing that the pilot was drunk; that the danger in embarking upon the flight was both obvious and great and the plaintiff was not so drunk as to be incapable of appreciating the nature and extent of the risk involved, and, therefore, he was to be taken to have fully accepted the risk of serious injury and implicitly discharged the pilot from liability for negligence in relation to the flying of the aircraft; and that, accordingly, the maxim volenti non fit iniuria applied as a defence to the plaintiff’s claim.

Fox LJ said: ‘If the plaintiff had himself been sober on the afternoon of the flight it seems to me that, by agreeing to be flown by Mr Murray, he must be taken to have accepted fully the risk of serious injury. The danger was both obvious and great . . None of [the facts] suggests that his facilities were so muddled that he was incapable of appreciating obvious risks . . I think he knew what he was doing and was capable of appreciating the risks. . . I think that in embarking upon the flight the plaintiff had implicitly waived his rights in the event of injury consequent on Mr Murray’s failure to fly with reasonable care.’

Judges:

Fox, Stocker LJJ, Sir George Walker

Citations:

[1990] 3 All ER 801, Times 18-Sep-1990, [1991] 2 QB 6, [1990] EWCA Civ 10

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Dann v Hamilton 1939
The maxim volenti non fit injuria, which originates from Roman law, is a notorious source of confusion. The court doubted whether the maxim ever could apply to license in advance a subsequent act of negligence, for if the consent precedes the act of . .

Cited by:

Cited – McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
Cited – Reeves (Joint Administratrix of the Estate of Martin Lynch, Deceased) v Commissioner of Police for Metropolis CA 10-Nov-1997
The fact that the deceased committed suicide whilst in custody does not necessarily absolve the police of blame if the deceased was a known suicide risk. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.190035

Pitts v The Personal Representatives of Mark James Hunt (Deceased) and Another: CA 1990

The plaintiff and a friend had spent the evening drinking at a disco before setting off on the friend’s motorcycle. The plaintiff was aware that the motorcyclist was neither licensed to ride a motorcycle nor insured. During the journey, the plaintiff had encouraged the cyclist to ride in a fast, reckless and hazardous manner, with the purpose of frightening members of the public. This conduct eventually led to a collision with an oncoming car in which the plaintiff was severely injured.
Held: In the circumstances the plaintiff could not recover; he played a full and active part in encouraging the young rider to commit offences which, if a death other than that of the young rider himself had occurred, would have amounted to manslaughter by the commission of a dangerous act. The plaintiff was precluded on grounds of public policy from recovering compensation for the injuries which he sustained in the course of the very serious offences in which he was participating. The Courts have adopted a pragmatic approach and it was not desirable to attempt to categorise the degree of seriousness involved in offences which will preclude recovery of compensation.

Judges:

Beldam LJ, Balcombe LJ

Citations:

[1991] 1 QB 24, [1990] 3 All ER 344, [1990] EWCA Civ 17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Dictum Disapproved – Ashton v Turner QBD 1981
The plaintiff sought damages after being injured as a passenger in a car. He and the driver had both just been involved in a burglary, and the driver, who had taken alcohol was attempting to escape. The driver was driving very dangerously in order . .
Cited – Saunders v Edwards CA 24-Mar-1986
The parties had agreed for the sale and purchase of land and chattels, but had deliberately misdescribed the apportionment so as to reduce tax liability. The purchasers then brought an action for misrepresentation. The vendor replied that the action . .

Cited by:

Cited – Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 31-Jul-2001
The police were not under any duty to protect someone who had been arrested from injuring himself in an attempt to escape. The claimant had a history of seeking to avoid capture by jumping from his flat window. On this occasion he injured himself in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.190063

Yorkshire Traction Company Limited v Searby: CA 19 Dec 2003

Buses had not been fitted with safety screens protecting drivers from possible assaults by passengers.
Held: There was no breach of regulation 4: ‘… It does not follow that liability is established simply by showing that it is reasonably foreseeable that the absence of a screen may leave the way open to injury to the driver. A consideration of the degree of risk involved in the absence of a screen is also necessary in assessing suitability’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice May Lord Justice Pill

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1856

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Pennington v Surrey County Council and Surrey Fire and Rescue Service CA 9-Nov-2006
The claimant firefighter crushed a finger trying to release a traffic accident victim with a heavy machine for expanding gaps in metal. The defendant appealed on liability. The court was asked whether a simple warning of the possible danger was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189921

King v Global Marine (KK) Ltd: SCS 13 Dec 2002

Action at the instance of the widow, the two children and the parents of the late Richard King. It arises from a fatal accident that the deceased suffered on board an oil rig owned and operated by the first defenders in the course of his employment with the second defenders.

Citations:

[2002] ScotCS 316

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.189743