Category: Personal Injury

Webb v Barclays Bank Plc and Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust: CA 16 Jul 2001

The claimant had suffered polio almost all her life. She fell, and was recommended to wear a calliper. She refused. Ultimately, an amputation was advised and in due course her leg was amputated above the knee by surgical operation. She commenced proceedings against the Bank, her employer, for failing properly to maintain the forecourt where she had fallen. The Bank asserted in its defence that the amputation and consequent problems were due to the negligence of the hospital. After the claimant added the hospital as a defendant, the bank settled with the claimant and now sought a contribution from the Trust.
Held: The lack of evidence from the doctors made it difficult to apportion the damages. The bank had failed to maintain the land on which she was injured and was liable for 25%, but the rest fell to the doctors. The negligent advice regarding amputation had not broken the chain of causation with regard to the bank’s own liability.

Judges:

Lord Justice Henry Lord Justice Judge And Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1141, [2001] Lloyd’s Rep Med 500, [2002] PIQR P8

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Luke v Kingsley Smith and Company and Others QBD 23-Jun-2003
The claimant sued various of those who had represented him in a claim against the Ministry of Defence. He believed that he had had to accept an inadequate sum in settlement after being at risk of losing the claim for non-prosecution. The defendant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147616

Phillips v Holliday and Another: CA 6 Jul 2001

The claimant was injured when scaffolding on which he was working collapsed. The defendants appealed the awards for loss of future earnings. The claimant was self-employed working through a limited company controlled by his wife. His past earnings were challenged.
Held: Though the accounting records were poor, there was some basis for an award. ‘The court is faced with the uncertainty of whether the business will continue when loss of earnings from the business is what the claimant must be compensated for, or whether the business might at some stage collapse, when it is the claimant’s disadvantage in the labour market for which he should receive compensation . . in assessing the reasonableness of the award, and in particular the multiplier used, it is fair to take into account that the claimant will be at a disadvantage in the labour market if the business were to collapse.’ The appeal succeeded to a minor extent.

Judges:

Aldous, Waller, Hale LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1074

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Smith v Manchester City Council CA 10-Jun-1974
Damages – earnings loss for persistent disability
The plaintiff, a part time domestic cleaner slipped and injured herself (a frozen shoulder) when working for the defendant. It was accepted that the cause of the slip was the defendant’s negligence. At the time of the claim she was still employed by . .
Cited – Ashcroft v Curtin CA 1971
A plaintiff, injured in a motor accident, was seeking to recover damages for loss of profit.
Held: The court commented adversely on the evidence and stated that no figures were given, and that counsel for the defendant had force in his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147609

Disley v Levine (T/a Airtrak Levine Paragliding): CA 11 Jul 2001

The claimant sought damages from her instructor, after being injured as a passenger trainee pilot of a paraglider. He responded that she was out of time, since the regulations applied. His appeal was refused. The system of regulation did not mention or encompass paragliders. No certificate of air-worthiness or air operator’s certificate was required. The objective of the flight was instruction, not passage.

Judges:

Henry LJ

Citations:

Times 29-Aug-2001, Gazette 31-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1087, [2002] 1 WLR 785

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Carriage by Air Acts (Application of Provisions) Order 1967 No 480, Warsaw Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules regarding International Air Transport 1929, Civil Aviation Act 1982

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Norma J Disley v Marc Levine QBD 9-Nov-2000
A trainee paraglider pilot was injured, and claimed against the instructor. He replied that her claim was out of time as a passenger of an air transport undertaking. The court held that his activities did not fall within the concepts of the . .
Cited – Holmes v Bangladesh Biman Corporation HL 1989
Mr Holmes was killed when the defendant’s aircraft in which he was a passenger crashed on a domestic flight in Bangladesh. As a domestic flight, it was not international carriage. The proper law of the contract was undoubtedly Bangladeshi law. Under . .

Cited by:

Cited – Laroche v Spirit of Adventure (UK) Ltd CA 21-Jan-2009
Hot Air balloon was an aircraft: damages limited
The claimant was injured flying in the defendant’s hot air balloon. The defendant said that the journey was covered by the 1967 Regulations and the damages limited accordingly. The claimant appealed against a decision that the balloon was an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147614

Keyse v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis, Scutts: CA 18 May 2001

The court considered liability where a police car on emergency duty hit Mr Scutts causing very serious injuries. The officer appealed against a finding of liability saying that the judge had declared irrelevant the fact he was on an emergency response.
Held: The officer’s appeal was allowed: ‘even in an emergency, a driver is required to drive reasonably carefully in all the circumstances. One significant feature of such cases where the vehicle in question is deployed by one of the emergency services, is that the driver is normally entitled to assume that other road users will not ignore the unmistakable evidence of its approach, and where appropriate, temporarily at any rate, will use the road accordingly. Pedestrians can usually be expected to follow the relevant advice in the Highway Code . . although drivers should allow for the unexpected when they are at the wheel of a car, it would inhibit the valuable work done for the community as a whole, if drivers in the emergency services were not allowed to drive their vehicles on the basis that pedestrians would recognise their warning lights and sirens and give them proper priority by keeping out of their paths.’

Judges:

Judge LJ, Latham LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 715

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Marshall v Osmond CA 1983
The plaintiff was passenger in a stolen car seeking to escape the police as they chased. The car was stopped, the plaintiff got out of the car, and was hit by a police car. He sought damages.
Held: His appeal against dismissal of his claim was . .
Outdated – Gaynor v Allen 1959
McNair J considered that when looking at the driving of a police officer, the standard remained that of the experienced skilled and careful driver. McNair considered a submission: ‘that if the motor-cyclist had been a civilian he would undoubtedly . .

Cited by:

Cited – Armsden v Kent Police CA 26-Jun-2009
The claimants sought damages as personal representatives after the deceased died when her car was hit by a police car responding to an emergency call. The defendant appealed a finding of negligence.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The judge had . .
Cited – An Informer v A Chief Constable CA 29-Feb-2012
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claim for damages against the police. He had provided them with information, but he said that they had acted negligently and in breach of contract causing him financial loss. The officer handling his . .
Cited – Smith v Nottinghamshire Police CA 23-Feb-2012
The claimant had been very severely injured when hit by a police car on an emergency call. She appealed against a finding that she was 75% to blame. The defendant argued that he was not liable at all.
Held:
Ward LJ discussed the Keyse . .
Cited – Macleod (By His Deputy and Litigation Friend, Macleod) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 3-Apr-2014
The claimant sought damages after being severely injured when knocked from his cycle by police officers in a car attending an emergency, and driving over the speed limit.
Held: The claim succeeded, and there had been no contributory negligence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Personal Injury, Police

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147553

Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and Cheshire County Council: CA 18 Jun 2001

The appellant sought leave to appeal against an order dismissing his claim for damages. He had been injured swimming in water on the defendant’s land. The defendant asserted that they had no duty of care to those who came onto the land and imperiled themselves.
Held: New evidence showed that the defendant was aware of the risks and had taken steps to deal with it. They arguably assumed a duty of care. Leave granted.

Judges:

Henry LJ

Citations:

Times 22-Mar-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 911

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 1(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Scott v Associated British Ports and Railways Board 1999
. .
Cited – Jebson v Ministry of Defence CA 28-Jun-2000
The claimant was a guardsman travelling in the rear of a service lorry. He fell from the tailgate suffering severe injury. He was drunk after a social trip.
Held: Though a person could normally expect to be responsible himself for incidents . .

Cited by:

Leave given – Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and Another CA 14-Mar-2002
The claimant was injured swimming in a lake in a park. Warning signs clearly indicated that the lake was dangerous for swimming.
Held: The authority were liable. They knew that the lake was attractive to swimmers, and that the signs were . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Land, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147581

Cachie and Others v Faluyi: CA 27 Jun 2001

The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim, though it raised a novel point under the 1976 Act. Did section 2(3) of the Act, providing: ‘Not more than one action shall lie for and in respect of the same subject-matter of complaint.’, mean that if a writ was issued in a Fatal Accidents Act claim brought on behalf of a deceased’s dependants but never served, this automatically precluded the bringing of a new action some years later?

Judges:

Henry, Brooke LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 998, [2001] 1 WLR 1966, [2001] CP Rep 102, [2002] 1 All ER 192, [2002] PIQR P5

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1976 2(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147593

Brian Watson v First Choice Holidays and Flights Limited and Aparta Hotels Caledonia S A: CA 25 Jun 2001

Two tourists were injured whilst on holiday in Spain. One recovered damages in Spain; the other sued the tour operators here, and the Spanish hotel operator resisted being joined, saying that his business being in Spain, he should not be sued here. The Regulations clearly enabled the tour operator to be sued here, and the operator in turn could seek his indemnity from the hotel operator here under the Convention. The parties could not be protected from the possibility of facing different consequences from different courts when there were several linked cases. The cases were referred to the European Court of Justice for their decision.

Judges:

Judge, Latham LJJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 972

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, European, Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147592

Morris v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines: CA 17 May 2001

An unaccompanied female passenger aboard an aircraft was indecently assaulted. She suffered mental, but no physical, injury. She claimed damages against the airline under the Convention.
Held: The assault was a special risk inherent in air travel, and damages would be recoverable for any ‘lesion corporelle/bodily injury.’ That phrase required some physical injury before damages could be awarded, and the claimant had suffered only mental injury.
courtcommentary.com Clinical depression, though an accident, does not constitute bodily injury under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention

Judges:

The Master of The Rolls, Lord Justice Peter Gibson Andlord Justice Latham

Citations:

Times 15-Jun-2001, Gazette 21-Jun-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 790, [2001] 3 WLR 351, [2001] 3 All ER 126, [2002] QB 100, [2001] CLC 1460, [2001] 2 All ER (Comm) 153

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Air France v Saks 1985
(United States Supreme Court) The claimant suffered damage to and become permanently deaf in one ear as a result of pressurisation changes while the aircraft descended to land. The pressure system had worked normally. The airline said that the . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – King v Bristow Helicopters Ltd; Morris v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines HL 28-Feb-2002
Psychiatric Injury under Warsaw Convention
The applicants were passengers who claimed damages for psychiatric injury, after accidents in aircraft.
Held: The Convention created strict liability on air carriers, but explicitly restricted damages to be payable for ‘bodily injury’. That . .
Cited – Barclay v British Airways plc CC 27-Feb-2008
(Oxford County Court) The claimant slipped as she boarded an aircraft and sought damages for injuries to her knee. Her claim was brought under the Convention. The defendant denied that the injury occurred as the result of an accident, saying that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147551

Langford v Hebran and Another: CA 15 Mar 2001

The claimant sought damages for the loss of his chances of pursuing his career as a kick-boxer. The judge considered four different courses of varying success which his career might have taken. He accepted that, whether or not those scenarios had materialised, the claimant would have earned a base level of income from giving kickboxing classes. He then evaluated the percentage chance of each scenario being realised and applied the percentage to the earnings the claimant would have derived on the basis of that scenario.
Held: Though the methodology in general was correct, the particular evaluation used by the judge was illogical. The judge should have applied an overall discount to reflect the many contingencies (including risk of injury) arising in respect of each scenario and the fact that none of them might have been realised. In calculating its own figures, the claimant’s chances of achieving fame and fortune as a kick-boxer at various stages in his career were evaluated on a scale from 80% to 20% and damages for his loss of earnings awarded accordingly.

Citations:

[2001] PIQR Q13, [2001] EWCA Civ 361

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Herring v Ministry of Defence CA 10-Apr-2003
The claimant had suffered serious injury in a parachuting accident which deprived him of the opportunity of pursuing his chosen career in the police force. The judge found ‘to the extent of virtual certainty’ that he would have applied to join the . .
Cited – Dixon v Were QBD 26-Oct-2004
The claimant and others were being driven by the defendant. All had drunk, and none wore seat belts. The claimant sought damages for his injuries. General damages were agreed, and the issue was as to loss of future earnings.
Held: The claimant . .
Cited – Gregg v Scott HL 27-Jan-2005
The patient saw his doctor and complained about a lump under his arm. The doctor failed to diagnose cancer. It was nine months before treatment was begun. The claimant sought damages for the reduction in his prospects of disease-free survival for . .
Cited – Brown v Ministry of Defence CA 10-May-2006
Claim for injury suffered whilst training in Army. The claimant was committed to a career in the Army, and had anticipated promotion. She complained that her loss of pension rights had been calculated at a rate to reflect an average length career. . .
Cited – Collett v Smith and Another QBD 11-Aug-2008
The claimant had been an eighteen year old playing football for Manchester United reserves when he was injured by a foul tackle which ended his football career. The defendant admitted liability, but denied that he would have gone on to be a premier . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147470

Steeds v Peverel Management Services Limited: CA 30 Mar 2001

Where it was not the claimant’s fault that proceedings had not been issued within the appropriate time limit, the judge when considering exercise of his discretion to admit the claim, should not be tempted to refuse to admit it on the basis that the claimant would have a clear claim for negligence against the solicitor who should have issued the proceedings. The judge was wrong to seek to distinguish the case and deny that the delay at issue related to periods only after the expiration of the limitation period. The judge had been wrong to conclude that the Civil Procedure rules required the claimant to have issued proceedings much earlier, since those rules could only affect the conduct of proceedings once they had been issued.

Citations:

Times 16-May-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 419

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 33(3)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Limitation, Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Professional Negligence

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147490

Allen and Others v British Rail Engineering Ltd and Another: CA 23 Feb 2001

The claimants suffered vibration white finger working for the defendants with percussive tools over many years to 1987, but then continued in other employments which also involved vibrating tools and which caused further damage. The claimants made claims in negligence against the defendants, in which the judge found that, in the light of their knowledge in 1973, the defendants should have carried out surveys to ascertain the incidence of vibratory white finger and should have warned the claimants of the risk. She also held that by 1976 the defendants should have found alternative less damaging work for the first claimant, or should have reduced the time he spent exposed to vibration. She assessed the appropriate compensation for the whole of the first claimant’s injury at andpound;11,000 but awarded him only andpound;4,000, deducting from the total andpound;1,500 for the period before 1976, andpound;1,500 for the period after 1987, and andpound;4,000, that is half the remaining andpound;8,000, for the period from 1976 to 1987 to take account of the damage already suffered and the fact that, on the evidence, if the defendants had complied with their duty, the claimant’s exposure could have been reduced by half. The first claimant accepted the deductions for damage suffered before 1973 and after 1987, but disputed the further deduction of andpound;4,000.
Held: It was contended for the first claimant that, once it had been shown that the defendants’ negligence made a material contribution to the injury suffered by the claimant, the defendants were liable for the whole of the claimant’s injury except in so far as it was shown or accepted that this had been aggravated by non-negligent exposure before 1973 or after 1987 by the first claimant’s new employers. The defendants argued that an employer was only liable for that part of the harm suffered by the employee which was attributable to the employer’s negligence. Schiemann LJ concluded: ‘In our judgment the case law as it now stands establishes five propositions of which the first is concerned with liability and the others with quantifying damages. (i) The employee will establish liability if he can prove that the employer’s tortious conduct made a material contribution to the employee’s disability. (ii) There can be cases where the state of the evidence is such that it is just to recognise each of two separate tortfeasors as having caused the whole of the damage of which the claimant complains; for instance where a passenger is killed as the result of a head-on collision between two cars each of which was negligently driven and in one of which he was sitting. (iii) However in principle the amount of the employer’s liability will be limited to the extent of the contribution which his tortious conduct made to the employee’s disability. (iv) The court must do the best it can on the evidence to make the apportionment and should not be astute to deny the claimant relief on the basis that he cannot establish with demonstrable accuracy precisely what proportion of his injury is attributable to the defendant’s tortious conduct. (v) The amount of evidence which should be called to enable a judge to make a just apportionment must be proportionate to the amount at stake and the uncertainties which are inherent in making any award of damages for personal injury.
The application of those propositions should lead to a just and principled result. We mention by way of coda that this approach seems to accord with the view of the authors of the American Law Institute Restatement of the Law, Torts, 2d (1965), section 433A(e): ‘Apportionment may also be made where a part of the harm caused would clearly have resulted from the innocent conduct of the defendant himself, and the extent of the harm has been aggravated by his tortious conduct.”

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 242, 2001] ICR 942, [2001] PIQR Q10

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Environment Agency v Ellis CA 17-Oct-2008
The claimant was injured working for the appellants. The appellants now appealed the finding that they were responsible saying that other factors contributed to the injury, and in particular that he had fallen at home. The claimant said that that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147447

Iman Abouzaid v Mothercare (Uk) Ltd: CA 21 Dec 2000

The defendant appealed a finding of liability under the Act. The plaintiff had hurt his eye assisting with a pushchair sold by the defendant. An elastic strap had rebounded into his eye. It was argued that the English Act went wider than the Directive in implementing it. Was the strap a defect within the Act?
Held: The statute must be interpreted ‘in the light of the wording and the purpose of the Directive so as to achieve the result which it has in view. The design permitted the risk to arise, and the product was defective: ‘though the case is close to the borderline, the product was defective within the meaning of the Act. The risk is in losing control of an elastic strap at a time when it is stretched and eyes are in the line of recoil. The product was defective because it was supplied with a design which permitted the risk to arise and without giving a warning that the user should not so position himself that the risk arose. Members of the public were entitled to expect better from the appellants. A factor in that expectation is the vulnerability of the eye and the serious consequences which may follow from a blunt injury to the eye. ‘

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill Lord Justice Chadwick And Mr Justice Wright

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 348

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Act 1987 2(1), Council Directive 85/374/EEC Art 6

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Commission v United Kingdom (Judgment) ECJ 29-May-1997
The UK provision in the 1987 Act did not conflict with the EC Directive on liability for defective products; there was an overriding provision as to interpretation.
Europa Approximation of laws – Liability . .
Cited – Paris v Stepney Borough Council HL 13-Dec-1950
(Reversed) The House considered a breach of a duty of care in respect of a man blinded in one eye, when there would be no breach of duty if his sight had not been impaired.
Held: The claim succeeded because he was known by his employers to . .
Cited – Roe v Ministry of Health CA 1954
The plaintiff complained that he had developed a spastic paraplegia following a lumbar puncture.
Held: An inference of negligence was rebutted. However the hospital authority was held to be vicariously liable for the acts or omissions of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Negligence, Personal Injury, European

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147381

Wylie on Behalf of SMP Motor Policies at Lloyds v Wake: CA 21 Dec 2000

The claimant sought to recover damages following a road accident. The driver’s insurance was defective. The driver claimed under section 151, but proceedings were issued without formal notice of the issue of proceedings having been given to MIB. The claim proceeded for some time before objection was made.
Held: There was a clear distinction between notice of a claim, and a notice of proceedings. The notice need not be in any particular form, but must be an unconditional clear notice of the intention to commence formal proceedings. No sufficient notice had been given. The claimant alleged an estoppel against the defendant. The section is not a statutory defence, it is a condition precedent to liability, and accordingly no estoppel could arise.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy, Lord Justice Laws, And Lord Justice Rix

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 349

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 152(1)(a)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Herbert v Railway Passenger Assurance Company 1938
. .
Cited – Weldrick v Essex and Suffolk Equitable Insurance Society Ltd QBD 1950
Nine months before the writ was issued to make a claim against the insured under a motor policy, the plaintiff’s solicitors had written to the insurers: ‘We understand your Society has repudiated liability, and we shall be grateful to have your . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147382

Evans v Secretary of State for Environment, Transport and Regions Motor Insurers’ Bureau: CA 18 Jan 2001

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 32, [2001] EWCA Civ 1211

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – White v White and The Motor Insurers Bureau HL 1-Mar-2001
The requirements as to the extent of knowledge in the mind of a passenger sufficient to defeat a claim against the Motor Insurers Bureau, of the driver’s lack of insurance, was actual knowledge. The rules implemented a European Directive which . .
See Also – Mighell v Reading and Another and Evans v Motor Insurers Bureau and White v White and Another CA 30-Sep-1998
Passengers were injured in motor vehicles. The drivers were uninsured, and the MIB had declined to make payment. The doctrine of direct effect did not apply where the allegation was that the Motor Insurers Bureau arrangement did not comply with a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, European, Insurance

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147396

Shell Tankers UK Limited v Jeromson; The Cherry Tree Machine Company Limited, Shell Tankers UK Limited v Dawson: CA 2 Feb 2001

The claimant’s husband had been employed as an apprentice fitter in a factory which manufactured dry cleaners’ presses. For two years, it was part of his job to mix asbestos flock with water in a bucket and then apply it to the plattens of a press in order to seal them to stop the steam escaping. He was therefore mixing the asbestos as part of the process of manufacturing a product containing asbestos.
Held: The 1931 Regulations were not limited in their application so as to exclude factory processes or products using raw asbestos. The rules applied to any industrial process involving the manipulation of asbestos, and the claim succeeded. The exemption for occasional use with only little exposure. Substantial exposure to asbestos dust created a known and foreseeable risk of injury.
Disapproving Watt v Fairfield, Hale LJ said: ‘It is however very difficult to imagine a factory or workshop whose main business was producing asbestos or asbestos products to which the exemption could possibly apply, given that only certain processes, infrequently carried on, are exempted and only then if none of the other defined processes is carried on in the same factory.’

Judges:

Hale, Mantell LJJ, Cresswell J

Citations:

Times 02-Mar-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 101, [2001] ICR 1223, [2001] PIQR P19

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Asbestos Industry Regulations 1931 (1931 No 1140)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Disapproved – Watt v Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company Limited and Upper Clyde Shipbuilders Ltd and Energy and Marine (Weirside) Limited SCS 3-Nov-1998
The pursuer sought reparation against three former shipbuilders. He had developed extensive bilateral pleural plaques and asbestosis.
Held: Lord Gill felt that it was possible to give the proviso a satisfactory meaning, notwithstanding his . .

Cited by:

Cited – McDonald v National Grid Electricity Transmission Plc SC 22-Oct-2014
Contact visiting plants supported asbestos claim
The deceased had worked as a lorry driver regularly collecting pulverized fuel ash from a power station. On his visits he was at areas with asbestos dust. He came to die from mesothelioma. His widow now pursued his claim that the respondent had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147424

Elt v Orsler and Another: CA 29 Jan 2001

Application for permission to appeal from a judgment dismissing the applicant’s personal injury claim against both defendants to the proceedings.
Held: Refused -no real prospect of success.

Judges:

Tuckey LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1226

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147414

King v RCO Support Services Limited and Yorkshire Traction Company Limited: CA 8 Dec 2000

The appellant was employed by the first respondents as a steam cleaning operative. The first respondent had contracted to supply cleaning services to the second respondent at one of the second respondent’s yards, where buses were cleaned. The appellant’s place of employment was at that yard. The yard was iced and despite attempts to grit the ice, he slipped and was injured. His claim had been dismissed because he had not been engaged in operations at the time.
Held: The task of moving the grit was itself a handling process. Appeal allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Henry And Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

Times 07-Feb-2001, [2000] EWCA Civ 314

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 4(1)(a), Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 12(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Lonsdale v Howard and Hallam Ltd CA 8-Feb-2006
The claimant sought damages after his agency with the defendants was terminated. The central issue was whether compensation was to be calculated at two years commission as derived from French practice or otherwise.
Held: ‘there is no clear . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147347

Regina – v- Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel, ex parte August; Similar: CA 18 Dec 2000

For the purposes of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme, a juvenile but willing participant in an act of buggery, is not deemed to be a victim of a crime of violence. The purpose of the section is to disapprove of such activity in general, and therefore neither participants is to be seen as a victim. The issue of inability to consent to a sexual act because of age, which are reflected in other sections do not apply to allegations of buggery. Since some conduct may constitute an offence whether or not it is accompanied by violence, it is necessary to have regard to the facts of the offence itself in order to decide whether it amounts to a crime of violence.

Citations:

Times 04-Jan-2001, [2001] QB 774, [2000] EWCA Civ 331

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Injuries Compensation Act 1995 1, Sexual Offences Act 1956 12 13

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (E) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel CA 3-Mar-2003
The claimant made a claim as regards a sexual assault committed against him in prison. The Panel refused the claim on the basis that he had consented.
Held: A claim might succeed where the consent was vitiated in such circumstances as would . .
Cited – Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority v First-Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) CA 3-Feb-2014
The claimant had been riding his cycle. A dog, known to be aggressive, chased him, he swerved ino the path of a car and was severely injured. His claim was rejected by the appellant saying that no crime of violence had been involved. CICA now . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Crime, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147364

Sniezek v Bundy (Letchworth) Limited: CA 7 Jul 2000

The claimant appealed against a finding that having once already issued a claim, a second claim was out of time, not accepting that she had had the knowledge effective to commence the limitation period.
Held: Judge LJ had ‘difficulty in perceiving how in any case where a claimant has sought advice and taken proceedings, it can rightly be held that the claimant had not then had relevant knowledge’.

Judges:

Simon Brown, Judge LJJ, Bell J

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 212, [2000] PIQR P213

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 11 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Ministry of Defence v AB and Others SC 14-Mar-2012
The respondent Ministry had, in 1958, conducted experimental atmospheric explosions of atomic weapons. The claimants had been obliged as servicemen to observe the explosions, and appealed against dismissal of their claims for radiation sickness . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147245

Killick and Nugent and others (Sued on her Own Behalf and on Behalf of Those Lloyd’s Syndicates Listed In the Schedule to the Writ of Summons): CA 11 Apr 2000

Claim under Personal Injury Accident policy after death of the policyholder company’s employee and others in an air crash

Judges:

Wvans, Thorpe, Laws LJJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 122

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Insurance

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147155

Casey v Morane Limited: CA 5 May 2000

An employee suffered injuries at work for which he was adjudged 15% responsible and the company 85%. Because of the accident he was demoted and suffered loss of earnings. He claimed that loss of earnings in his action for damages. The court found that the company should pay the damages. The company was itself predominantly responsible for the damage caused, and these losses flowed directly from the accident.

Citations:

Gazette 25-May-2000, Times 10-May-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 147

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147180

Royston Frederick Williams v BOC Gases Ltd: CA 29 Mar 2000

The plaintiff claimed damages from his employer in respect of injuries suffered during the course of his employment. The defendant paid the claimant a sum to which he had no contractual entitlement, saying that it was to be treated as an advance against any damages that he might be awarded against the defendant. The money came from the defendant’s own fund.
Held: ‘In my judgment, the judge was over-influenced by the decision of this court in McCamley which should be treated, until it receives the consideration of the House of Lords, as a case turning on its own particular facts: in other words, for what members of that court, deciding the issue as a jury question, thought was just, reasonable and in accordance with public policy on the facts of that case.’ and ‘The ‘benevolence’ exception is limited in terms to gifts arising from the benevolence of third parties, and does not cover benevolent gifts made by the wrongdoer himself, for which allowance ought prima facie to be made against any compensation he might have to pay. Neither of the justifications for the benevolence exception apply to the tortfeasor. Deductibility will encourage him to make benevolent payments in future to injured employees, rather than the reverse. And it certainly cannot be said that in making the gift, his intention was to benefit the plaintiff rather than to relieve himself of liability pro tanto: he would have been happy to achieve both purposes at once. A fortiori in a case in which he said in terms, at the time he made the gift, that it was to be treated as an advance against any damages he might have to pay.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Thorpe LJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 95, [2000] ICR 1181

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Doubted – McCamley v Cammell Laird Shipbuilders Limited CA 1990
The plaintiff suffered injury at work and claimed damages. He had received a lump sum under insurance provided by the defendant’s parent company for the benefit of employees injured at work. Did the lump sum payment fall to be deducted from the . .
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 by:

Cited – Pirelli General Plc and others v Gaca CA 26-Mar-2004
The claimant was awarded damages from his employers, who claimed that the benefits received by the claimant from an insurance policy to which the defendants had contributed should be set off against the claim.
Held: McCamley was no longer good . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147128

Luke Warren v Northern General Hospital Trust: CA 4 Apr 2000

The court was asked ‘whether the court should alter the discount rate, set by the House of Lords in Wells v Wells [1999] 1 AC 345 (judgment delivered on 16 July 1998), at 3%, and if so to what new rate. A further question also arises whether the impact of taxation on the fund is such that, even if the general rate is not altered, it should be in this case.
The facts’

Judges:

Stuart-Smith, Mummery, Tukey LJJ

Citations:

[2000] EWCA Civ 100

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.147133

Gogay v Hertfordshire County Council: CA 26 Jul 1999

Application for leave to appeal – granted.

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1964

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Leave application – Gogay v Hertfordshire County Council CA 26-Jul-2000
The employee sought damages for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, even though she remained throughout the employment of the Council against whom she was bringing proceedings.
Held: Her remaining in employment was a factor . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146879

Alexander and others v Midland Bank Plc: CA 22 Jul 1999

Citations:

[1999] EWCA Civ 1918

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Alexander and Others v Midland Bank Plc MCLC 26-Aug-1998
(Mayor’s and City of London Court) In claim for repetitive strain injury for typists in absence of obvious physical damage was on balance not psychosomatic. Plaintiffs could show more than passing pain and discomfort and the scheme of work imposing . .
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, Negligence

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.146833

Len Jones and Doreen Ann Jones v Wrekin District Council: CA 9 Jul 1999

A plaintiff cannot delay in the service of a writ claiming damages for personal injuries on the basis of having failed to obtain the appropriate medical evidence. Such a delay prejudiced a defendant’s opportunity himself to prepare his defence. A claimant should keep the defendant informed and seek to agree a way forward.

Citations:

Times 29-Jul-1999, [1999] EWCA Civ 1800

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.146715

Validi v Fairstead House School Trust Ltd: CA 9 Jun 2005

The claimant sought damages for work related stress. The court in dismissing the appeal regretted that so much had been spent on the case. The principles have now been settled, and the parties should test a case against those principles, and go for early mediation.

Judges:

Longmore LJ

Citations:

Times 24-Jun-2005

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.227910

Warriner v Warriner: CA 24 Jan 2002

Where it was proposed to the court to apply a different discount rate when determining investment return on a sum awarded in a personal injury action as damages for future pecuniary loss, as against the rate set under the Lord Chancellor’s guidelines, the court must look at the Lord Chancellor’s reasons for fixing the rate, and depart only where for example the case was in some category, or which had different and special reasons, in either case not considered when setting the rate.

Judges:

Mummery, Latham, Dyson LJJ

Citations:

Times 28-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 81, [2003] 3 All ER 447, [2002] 1 WLR 1703

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996 1(2), Damages (Personal Injury) Order 2001 (SI 2001 No 2301)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.216757

Todd and Others v Adams and Another: QBD 5 Jun 2001

The claimants were the relatives of fishermen who had died at sea when their vessel capsized. They alleged that the ship filed to meet the statutory criteria for stability, and that the defendants were negligent and in breach of statutory duty to them. The court held that the statute and regulations provided clear remedies by way of fines and registration and certification. There was no provision for creating any civil liability toward the claimants, and the claim failed.

Judges:

Aikens J

Citations:

Times 20-Aug-2001

Statutes:

Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) Rules 1975 (1975 No 333), Fishing Vessels (Safety Provisions) Act 1970, Merchant Shipping Act 1995 121

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Transport

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.160183

Leach v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary: CA 31 Jul 1998

It was arguable that the police owed a duty of care in negligence to a volunteer they called in to act as appropriate adult in harrowing and traumatic police interviews, and who later suffered nervous shock and stress as a result. The claimant had acted as such in an infamous multiple murder case.

Judges:

Henry LJ, Pill LJ, Brooke LJ

Citations:

Times 04-Sep-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1368, [1999] 1 All ER 215, [1999] 1 WLR 1421

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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, Police

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144847

Sharp By her Next Friend Sharp v Pereira and Motor Insurers’ Bureau: CA 24 Jun 1998

The court considered the arrangement for interim payments of damages awards where the claim was to be made through the Bureau. The agreement between the Bureau and the insurer members predated and did not allow for such payments.
Held: The MIB, seeking clarification, had made no interim payment. They could have made a substantial part payment allowing the plaintiff’s life to proceed, without prejudicing their argument. There is no reason to distinguish between the two situations: one, where the Motor Insurers’ Bureau will be directly responsible for meeting a claim, and the other where a particular insurer will be responsible under the agreement to meet the claim. The amended wording of the subparagraph is not to be construed in a technical manner. That is underlined by the fact that technically there is no ‘Motor Insurers’ Bureau Agreement’. The title which is given to the agreement which was made between the Secretary of State and the Bureau is the Uninsured Drivers Agreement.
The Rules Committee made their intent clear in the language they used but they did not express it helpfully. In future it should be read as applying to both situations: (1) where the liability will be met by the Bureau, and, (2), where the liability will be met by an insurance company because that insurance company was originally the insurer in relation to the driver concerned.

Judges:

Lord Woolf MR, Millett, Pill LJJ

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1085, [1999] RTR 125, [1998] PIQR Q129, [1999] 1 WLR 195, [1998] 4 All ER 145

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 151

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Powney v Coxage QBD 8-Mar-1988
The court heard a dispute as to whether, when the Motor Insurers’ Bureau had been joined as a defendant to an action, it was possible to obtain an interim payment under the unamended form of the rules.
Held: It was not possible for such an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144564

Chapman v London Borough of Barking and Dagenham: CA 13 Jul 1998

The plaintiff was severely injured when a branch was broken from a tree in a high wind, and fell onto the van he was driving. The land-owner appealed a finding of liability in nuisance.
Held: The local authority were also the highway authority, and it was the defendants’ duty regularly to inspect the tree for signs of danger, and to do what was necessary to maintain the tree in a safe condition. The evidence was that the danger arose from earlier prunings. The appeal was in effect an appeal on the facts, and therefore failed.

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1200

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Noble v Harrison CA 1926
A tree shed a limb onto a passer-by, causing personal injury. The Court of Appeal reversed the original finding in favour of the claimant because the defect could not have been discovered by inspection. A land-owner may become liable for a naturally . .
Cited – Watt (or Thomas) v Thomas HL 1947
When Scots Appellate Court may set decision aside
The House considered when it was appropriate for an appellate court in Scotland to set aside the judgment at first instance.
Lord Thankerton said: ‘(1) Where a question of fact has been tried by a judge without a jury, and there is no question . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Nuisance, Personal Injury

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144679

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.

Citations:

Times 15-May-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 838

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 – 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 by:

Cited – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Police, Negligence

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144316

A B and others v Liverpool City Council; Nugent Care Society (Formerly Catholic Social Services [Liverpool]) and Trustees of National Children’s Home and Orphanage Registered: CA 15 Jun 1998

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Civ 1000

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – McDonnell and Another v Walker CA 24-Nov-2009
The defendant appealed against the disapplication of section 11 of the 1980 Act under section 33.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The defendant had not contributed significantly to the delay: ‘the defendant received claims quite different in . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Limitation

Updated: 30 May 2022; Ref: scu.144479

Woolley v Essex County Council: CA 17 May 2006

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson Lord Justice Pill Lady Justice Hallett

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 753

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Smith v Manchester City Council CA 10-Jun-1974
Damages – earnings loss for persistent disability
The plaintiff, a part time domestic cleaner slipped and injured herself (a frozen shoulder) when working for the defendant. It was accepted that the cause of the slip was the defendant’s negligence. At the time of the claim she was still employed by . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.244382

Widdowson (By her Father and Next Friend Widdowson) v Newgate Meat Corporation Scullion and Enaas: CA 19 Nov 1997

Res ipsa loquitur might be used to establish fault where the driver drove into a pedestrian on a carriageway and had no explanation for the accident.

Citations:

Gazette 10-Dec-1997, Times 04-Dec-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2763

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.143162

Spargo v North Essex District Health Authority: CA 13 Mar 1997

The test of ‘When a plaintiff became aware of the cause of an injury’ is a subjective test of what passed through plaintiff’s mind. ‘(1) the knowledge required to satisfy s14(1)(b) is a broad knowledge of the essence of the causally relevant act or omission to which the injury is attributable;
(2) ‘attributable’ in this context means ‘capable of being attributed to’, in the sense of being a real possibility;
(3) a plaintiff has the requisite knowledge when she knows enough to make it reasonable for her to begin to investigate whether or not she has a case against the defendant. Another way of putting this is to say that she will have such knowledge if she so firmly believes that her condition is capable of being attributed to an act or omission which she can identify (in broad terms) that she goes to a solicitor to seek advice about making a claim for compensation;
(4) on the other hand, she will not have the requisite knowledge if she thinks she knows the acts or omissions she should investigate but in fact is barking up the wrong tree; or if her knowledge of what the defendant did or did not do is so vague or general that she cannot fairly be expected to know what she should investigate; or if her state of mind is such that she thinks her condition is capable of being attributed to the act or omission alleged to constitute negligence, but she is not sure about this, and would need to check with an expert before she could be properly said to know that it was.’
This branch of the law is grossly overloaded with reported cases. The court set out four principles for testing such actions, distinguishing the more stringent test of proof of causation from the much less rigorous statutory test of attributability’ and ‘After all, the policy of Parliament, in these cases which would otherwise be statute-barred, is to give a plaintiff who has the requisite low level of knowledge three years in which to establish by inquiry whether the identified injury was indeed probably caused by the identified omission and whether the omission (identified initially in broad terms) amounted to actionable negligence. The judge’s approach would be to stop the three years from even starting to run until a much more advanced stage of the investigation had been completed.’

Judges:

Brooke, Nourse, Waller LJJ

Citations:

(1997) 37 BMLR 99, [1997] EWCA Civ 1232, [1997] 8 Med LR 125, [1997] PIQR 235

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 14(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Spargo v North Essex District Health Authority QBD 1996
A plaintiff’s knowledge that her injury could be attributed to hypoxia, is not knowledge that the injury is attributable to the act or omission alleged to constitute negligence as might be pleaded in a statement of claim and no ordinary plaintiff . .

Cited by:

Applied – Mirza v Birmingham Health Authority QBD 31-Jul-2001
The claimant had undergone heart surgery as an infant in 1976, and claimed damages for professional negligence. The procedure involved a dangerous procedure, a resection of coarctation. As a consequence, the Claimant suffered a number of problems . .
Cited – Graham v Entec Europe Ltd (T/A Exploration Associates) CA 6-Aug-2003
The claimant’s bungalow suffered subsidence. Repair works were undertaken as advised by the defendants, but unsuccessfully. The claimant’s insurers instructed experts negotiators to investigate with a view to a claim. The defendants now claimed the . .
Applied – O’Driscoll v Dudley Health Authority CA 30-Apr-1998
The plaintiff sought damages for the negligence of the respondent in her care at birth. Years later the family concluded that her condition was a result of negligence. They waited until she was 21, when they mistakenly believed that she became an . .
Cited – Roberts vWinbow (3) CA 4-Dec-1998
The plaintiff was treated for depression by the defendant by prescription of drugs. She sufferred a reaction, but now claimed that the doctor’s slow reaction caused her to suffer lasting injury. The question on appeal was, if a plaintiff suffers . .
Cited – Haward and others v Fawcetts HL 1-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages from his accountants, claiming negligence. The accountants pleaded limitation. They had advised him in connection with an investment in a company which investment went wrong.
Held: It was argued that the limitation . .
Cited – Farraj and Another v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust and Another QBD 26-May-2006
The claimants sought damages after the birth of their child with a severe hereditary disease which they said the defendant hospital had failed to diagnose after testing for that disease. The hospital sought a contribution from the company CSL who . .
Cited – Kamar v Nightingale and Another QBD 14-Dec-2007
The claimant sought damages from his barrister saying that he should have introduced evidence of his good character during the trial. The defendant appealed against the order permitting extension of the limitation period.
Held: The court had . .
Cited – Ministry of Defence v AB and Others SC 14-Mar-2012
The respondent Ministry had, in 1958, conducted experimental atmospheric explosions of atomic weapons. The claimants had been obliged as servicemen to observe the explosions, and appealed against dismissal of their claims for radiation sickness . .
Cited – Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others CA 23-May-2014
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injury which had been rejected on basis that it was out of time. He had contracted cancer in 2002, but had recovered. He later came to attribute this to exposure to asbestos at work . .
Cited – Siddiqui v University of Oxford QBD 5-Dec-2016
The University applied to have struck out the claim by the claimant for damages alleging negligence in its teaching leading to a lower class degree than he said he should have been awarded.
Held: Strike out on the basis that the claim was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.141628

Cross v Kirklees Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 27 Jun 1997

The Council’s duty to maintain a highway is not absolute. It must take reasonable steps to prevent or clear ice forming on pathway. Lord Justice Evans analysed the application of Section 41 to a situation which arose from ice and snow. In any case of this kind there is an obligation on the plaintiff to establish that there has been, as a result of the defect of which he or she complains, a foreseeable risk of injury. He said: ‘I note that first the council’s duty under s 41 is simply to ‘maintain the highway’. There is no express reference to safety or to the absence of danger. But the cause of action which arises when the duty is broken requires proof of injury caused by the failure to maintain, and the risk of injury must have been foreseeable by the council (per Diplock LJ in Burnside’s case and Lord Denning MR in Heydon’s case ). So for the purposes of civil liability the duty is to maintain the highway so as to exclude the foreseeable risk of injury resulting from its use.’ He later said: ‘The duty to maintain includes taking preventative or clearance measures which are sufficient to keep the surface reasonably safe . This means (a) what measures are sufficient will depend in part on what use of the highway can be anticipated, and by whom; and (b) that if no or insufficient measures are taken within a reasonable time, and injury is caused thereby, then the plaintiff may establish at least a prima facie breach of duty under s 41. The authority can then rely, if it chooses to do so, on the statutory defence under s 58.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Evans

Citations:

Times 10-Jul-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1986, [1998] 1 All ER 564

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Heydon’s Case 1584
Mischief rule of Iinterpretation
Lord Coke stated the basis of the mischief rule of interpretation: ‘For the sure and true interpretation of all statutes in general (be they penal or beneficial, restrictive or enlarging of the common law), four things are to be discerned and . .

Cited by:

Cited – Jane Marianne Sandhar, John Stuart Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions CA 5-Nov-2004
The claimant’s husband died when his car skidded on hoar frost. She claimed the respondent was liable under the Act and at common law for failing to keep it safe.
Held: The respondent had not assumed a general responsibility to all road users . .
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 – Enion v Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council CA 9-Feb-1999
The roadway was regularly closed off when flooded by the sea, and then cleaned up afterwards. The claimant slipped on seaweed on the road. The Council appealed against an award of damages, saying it was not practicable to close the road off to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Local Government

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.142383

Police of The Metropolis v Brown: QBD 31 Jul 2018

‘The appeal concerns the operation of the qualified one-way costs shifting regime (known as ‘QOCS’) contained in Section II of Part 44 of the Civil Procedure Rules (‘CPR’). The Judge decided that QOCS applied, automatically, to protect Ms Brown against any adverse costs order which might be made against her in the Police’s favour. The Judge’s reason for doing so, in summary, was that her claim included a claim for damages for personal injury which related to all the various parts of her claim, so that he had no discretion to disapply QOCS protection.’

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2471 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Costs, Personal Injury

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.625522

Housecroft v Burnett: CA 22 May 1985

The appeal court should not interfere with an award under for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, unless it is manifestly too high or too low or it can be shown that the judge has erred in principle in relation to some element that goes to make up the award. The award of the cost of care is to provide for the reasonable and proper care of the plaintiff or claimant, and the court must consider whether it is sufficient to enable the plaintiff, among other things, to make reasonable recompense to the relative. So, in cases where the relative has given up gainful employment to look after the plaintiff, it is natural that the plaintiff would not wish the relative to lose out and the court would award sufficient to enable the plaintiff to achieve that result. The ceiling would be the commercial rate. The mother was providing care. The court recognises that part of the reasonable and proper cost of providing for the plaintiff’s needs is to enable her to make a present, or series of presents, to her mother.
Lord Justice O’Connor held that: ‘In cases where the relative has given up gainful employment to look after the plaintiff, I would regard it as natural that the plaintiff would not wish the relative to be the loser and the court would award sufficient to allow the plaintiff to achieve that result. The ceiling would be the commercial rate.’

Judges:

Lord Justice O’Connor

Citations:

[1986] 1 All ER 332, [1985] EWCA Civ 18

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons CA 19-Mar-2003
Both parties appealed against the lower court’s orders. The claimant, a child was injured by a car driven by the defendant, who had been found 25% responsible. The claimant had suffered head injuries, and subsequently epilepsy.
Held: The award . .
Cited – Giambrone and others v Sunworld Holidays Ltd CA 18-Feb-2004
Many holidaymakers had suffered gastro-enteritis and sued for compensation. They had sought a sum to reflect the value of gratuitous care.
Held: Save in more serious cases, awards for children suffering gastro-enteritis and cared for by their . .
Cited – Mills v British Rail Engineering Ltd CA 1992
Defendants appealed an award of andpound;8,000 to the widow of a man who died of lung cancer, for her caring for him in his last months. She claimed two hours’ services each day for the first two months of his illness, increasing to three hours, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.262660

Birmingham City Council, Regina (on the Application of) v The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Admn 17 Jun 2005

Judges:

Jenriques J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1405 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Local Government (Discretionary Payments) Regulations 1996 35(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Rose v Plenty CA 7-Jul-1975
Contrary to his employers orders, a milkman allowed children to assist him in his milkround. One was injured, and sued the milkman’s employer.
Held: The milkman had not gone so far outside the activities for which he was employed for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Personal Injury, Vicarious Liability

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.230107

Stenning v Home Office: CA 17 Jan 2002

Appeal by the Home Office against an order of Mr. Recorder Bullock at the Newcastle on Tyne County Court on 4th April 2001 when he held that the Home Office was liable to the claimant, who is a prisoner serving a life sentence, for an agreed sum of pounds 12,000 damages arising out of an incident at Wakefield Prison in December 1999 when the claimant was held hostage by another prisoner for about five hours. Towards the end of that period he suffered serious stab wounds and subsequently suffered post traumatic stress disorder.

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 51

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.216747

Parsons v Warren and Another: CA 31 Jan 2002

Appeal from a judgment that the claim for damages for industrial disease, commenced by the respondent against the appellants had been brought by the respondent within three years of his date of knowledge for the purposes of section 11(4) and section 14 of the Limitation Act 1980, and that, in any event, he would override the primary limitation period under section 33 of the Act and permit the action to proceed. The appellants appeal both conclusions of the judge.

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 130

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.216734

Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons: CA 19 Mar 2003

Both parties appealed against the lower court’s orders. The claimant, a child was injured by a car driven by the defendant, who had been found 25% responsible. The claimant had suffered head injuries, and subsequently epilepsy.
Held: The award of andpound;80,000 for pain suffering and loss of amenity was not so wrong as to allow interference by the Court (Housecroft). The court increased the award to take into account the need for extra assistance if the appellant has children, or if she finds herself living alone, or even wanting to go on holiday alone, when assessing her need for future care. She should also receive the costs of the receivership at the court of protection.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Scott Baker

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 372

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Housecroft v Burnett CA 22-May-1985
The appeal court should not interfere with an award under for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, unless it is manifestly too high or too low or it can be shown that the judge has erred in principle in relation to some element that goes to make up . .
Cited – Hunt v Severs HL 7-Sep-1994
The tortfeasor, a member of the claimant’s family provided her with voluntary nursing care after the injury. The equivalent cost of that care, was recoverable, but would be held on trust for the carer. The underlying rationale of English Law is to . .
Cited – Steven Robert Evans v Pontypridd Roofing Limited CA 9-Nov-2001
The claimant sought as part of his damages the cost of the care provided by family members. Counsel for the defendant raised issues about tax, national insurance and travel and other costs which a professional carer would have to bear, which led the . .
See Also – Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons CA 16-Jul-1997
. .
Cited – Cassel v Riverside Health Authority 1994
A person who has been rendered a patient as a result of the actions of a tortfeasor is entitled to require the tortfeasor to bear the costs of the receiver as part of the damages and, as part of the damages, they cannot escape a discount for . .

Cited by:

See Also – Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons CA 16-Jul-1997
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.179912

Mills v British Rail Engineering Ltd: CA 1992

Defendants appealed an award of andpound;8,000 to the widow of a man who died of lung cancer, for her caring for him in his last months. She claimed two hours’ services each day for the first two months of his illness, increasing to three hours, and then to four hours a day during the next two months up to the time his cancer was diagnosed. For the next six months the claim was elevated to what in essence represented ten hours’ services each day. For the last three months a claim was made for 14 hours’ services each day. Except for this final period, the claim was based on a rate of andpound;3 per hour. For the last three months the rate was andpound;3.25 per hour, the charging rates for carers who were not qualified nurses with caring skills, and the award of andpound;8,000 was based on two-thirds of the full commercial rate for such services, without any extra allowances for agency charges.
Held: ‘there can be no justification in principle for differentiating between full-time care needing really a trained nurse and full-time care needing a carer giving love and affection to the patient, the dying person, to a degree far more than would be expected in any ordinary way of life. In principle it must be, in my judgment, a matter for an award only in recompense for care by the relative well beyond the ordinary call of duty for the special needs of the sufferer. ‘

Judges:

Dillon and Staughton LJJ, Neill LJ

Citations:

[1992] 1 PIQR Q130

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Housecroft v Burnett CA 22-May-1985
The appeal court should not interfere with an award under for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, unless it is manifestly too high or too low or it can be shown that the judge has erred in principle in relation to some element that goes to make up . .

Cited by:

Cited – Giambrone and others v Sunworld Holidays Ltd CA 18-Feb-2004
Many holidaymakers had suffered gastro-enteritis and sued for compensation. They had sought a sum to reflect the value of gratuitous care.
Held: Save in more serious cases, awards for children suffering gastro-enteritis and cared for by their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.194258

Giambrone and others v Sunworld Holidays Ltd: CA 18 Feb 2004

Many holidaymakers had suffered gastro-enteritis and sued for compensation. They had sought a sum to reflect the value of gratuitous care.
Held: Save in more serious cases, awards for children suffering gastro-enteritis and cared for by their family should not exceed pounds 50.00. ‘This may well be a situation in which appropriate representatives of claimants and defendants, perhaps under the auspices of the Civil Justice Council, might usefully try to agree a guideline tariff for gastro-enteritis cases generally, depending on the severity of the illness.’ Care should be taken to avoid excess costs where possible.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke (Vice-President Of The Court Of Appeal (Civil Division) Lord Justice Mance And Mr Justice Park

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 158, [2004] 2 All ER 891

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Housecroft v Burnett CA 22-May-1985
The appeal court should not interfere with an award under for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, unless it is manifestly too high or too low or it can be shown that the judge has erred in principle in relation to some element that goes to make up . .
Appeal from – Giambrone and others v JMC Holidays Ltd (Formerly Sunworld Holidays Ltd) QBD 20-Dec-2002
. .
Cited – Steven Robert Evans v Pontypridd Roofing Limited CA 9-Nov-2001
The claimant sought as part of his damages the cost of the care provided by family members. Counsel for the defendant raised issues about tax, national insurance and travel and other costs which a professional carer would have to bear, which led the . .
Cited – Hunt v Severs HL 7-Sep-1994
The tortfeasor, a member of the claimant’s family provided her with voluntary nursing care after the injury. The equivalent cost of that care, was recoverable, but would be held on trust for the carer. The underlying rationale of English Law is to . .
Cited – Mills v British Rail Engineering Ltd CA 1992
Defendants appealed an award of andpound;8,000 to the widow of a man who died of lung cancer, for her caring for him in his last months. She claimed two hours’ services each day for the first two months of his illness, increasing to three hours, and . .

Cited by:

Cited – Ross v Stonewood Securities Ltd ChD 7-Oct-2004
The claimant appealed an order reducing his award of costs. . .
Cited – A v The Archbishop of Birmingham QBD 30-Jun-2005
Assessment of damages following child abuse by Catholic priest.
Held: General damages of andpound;50,000 were in line with Coxon and were approved. A had not been shown to be, and is not, incapable of managing his affairs. The court differed . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.193624

Joseph Smith (Pauper) v Charles Baker and Sons: HL 21 Jul 1891

Judges:

Lord Halsbury LC

Citations:

[1891] UKHL 2, [1891] AC 325

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Yarmouth v France CA 11-Aug-1887
The plaintiff was employed by the defendant to drive carts. He objected that the horse had a vicious nature, but was obliged to drive it in any event. The horse kicked him.
Held: For the purposes of the 1880 Act, the plaintiff was an employee, . .

Cited by:

Cited – Farraj and Another v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust (KCH) and Another CA 13-Nov-2009
The claimant parents each carried a gene making any child they bore liable to suffer a serious condition. On a pregnancy the mother’s blood was sent for testing to the defendants who sent it on to the second defendants. The condition was missed, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.263829

Smith v Central Asbestos Co Ltd; Central Asbestos Co Ltd v Dodd: HL 1973

The House considered at what point an injured person was to be deemed to have become aware of his injury so as to start the limitation period.
Held: A majority rejected the proposition that knowledge of ‘material facts’ for section 1(3) purposes included knowledge that the defendant’s conduct entitled the plaintiff to a legal remedy.
Lord Reid said: ‘I agree with the view expressed in the Court of Appeal that this test is subjective. We are not concerned with ‘the reasonable man’. Less is expected of a stupid or uneducated man than of a man of intelligence and wide experience.’ As to the 1963 Act, it had ‘a strong claim to the distinction of being the worst drafted Act on the statute book’. And ‘So probably the key lies in the use of the word ‘attributable.’ That means capable of being attributed. ‘Attribute’ has a number of cognate meanings; you can attribute a quality to a person or thing, you can attribute a product to a source or author, or you can attribute an effect to a cause. The essential element is connection of some kind.’

Judges:

Lord Reid

Citations:

[1973] AC 518, [1972] 2 All ER 1135, [1972] 3 WLR 333, 13 KIR 75, [1972] 2 Lloyds Rep 413

Statutes:

Limtation Act 1963 7(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Smith v Central Asbestos Co Ltd CA 1971
Edmund-Davies LJ said of a report prepared by a committee of which had been chairman into ‘whether any alteration is desirable in the law relating to the limitation of actions in cases of personal injury where the injury or disease giving rise to . .

Cited by:

No longer good law – Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council HL 17-Jun-2004
A attended the defendant’s schools between 1977 and 1988. He had always experienced difficulties with reading and writing and as an adult found those difficulties to be an impediment in his employment. He believed them to be the cause of the . .
Cited – Haward and others v Fawcetts HL 1-Mar-2006
The claimant sought damages from his accountants, claiming negligence. The accountants pleaded limitation. They had advised him in connection with an investment in a company which investment went wrong.
Held: It was argued that the limitation . .
Cited – Ministry of Defence v AB and Others SC 14-Mar-2012
The respondent Ministry had, in 1958, conducted experimental atmospheric explosions of atomic weapons. The claimants had been obliged as servicemen to observe the explosions, and appealed against dismissal of their claims for radiation sickness . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.200436

Gage v King: 1960

The issue was as to the recoverability, in personal injury proceedings, of the wife’s medical expenses which had been paid for by the husband out of the joint account. After referring to the findings which a court may be driven to make in relation to a joint account as between husband and wife where the marriage has ended by death or divorce: ‘But what is to happen to the balance in the joint account when the marriage breaks up is a very different question from that of the mutual rights of the parties in relation to the account while the marriage is still subsisting. As I have said, I do not think that such an arrangement between husband and wife is meant to be attended with legal consequences as between the two spouses while the marriage is still subsisting. Mrs Gage’s right to draw upon the joint account was subject to no legal limitation . .

Judges:

Diplock J

Citations:

[1961] 1 QB 188, [1960] 3 All ER 62

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Sandra Estelle Fielding v The Royal Bank of Scotland Plc CA 11-Feb-2004
The husband and wife had signed a bank mandate allowing the bank to act upon the authorisation of either of them. The wife complained that the bank should not be able to recover from her any sums expended by the husband.
Held: The mandate . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.194783

Curtis v Betts: CA 1990

The defendant owned a bull mastiff dog. It was known to react fiercely when protecting its territory. The plaintiff, a child, had known the dog since it was a puppy, and approached as the dog was about to be put into a car. The dog bit his face causing injury.
Held: The owner was strictly liable. Where it was known the dog may react aggressively, it was not necessary for the plaintiff to show that the dog had any abnormal characteristics.

Citations:

[1990] 1 WLR 459, [1990] 1 All ER 769

Statutes:

Animals Act 1971 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Dictum applied – Cummings v Grainger CA 1977
An untrained Alsatian dog was turned loose in a scrap-yard to deter intruders. The dog seriously injured the plaintiff who had entered the yard.
Held: The requirements of section 2(2) were satisfied but the defendant was entitled to rely upon . .

Cited by:

Approved – Mirvahedy v Henley and Henley CA 21-Nov-2001
Horses with no abnormal characteristics were panicked, ran out and collided with a car. The car driver sought damages.
Held: The question was not whether the animals betrayed abnormal characteristics of which the owners should have been aware, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Personal Injury

Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.180026

Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte Pearson: Admn 11 May 1999

The claimant sought judicial review of the Board’s decision to restrict his award by two thirds for his previous driving convictions of driving with excess alcohol and driving whilst disqualified.
Held: The Board’s decision was for them. There was no error in law. They were a body of experts to whom the responsibility of assessing the value of awards had been delegated. Appeal dismissed.

Judges:

Moses J

Citations:

[1999] EWHC Admin 420

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board, ex parte Thompstone CA 1984
The court considered the circumstances of a claimant’s criminal record as they affected his entitlement to compensation under the scheme: ‘In each case, although different categories of circumstances can be taken into account, the issue is the same. . .
Cited – Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte Moore CA 23-Apr-1999
Where a claimant acquired a criminal conviction after the claim had been referred to a single board member for decision, he was entitled, despite the absence of an explicit rule, to refer the case back to the board. Reasons for a decision should . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Brind HL 7-Feb-1991
The Home Secretary had issued directives to the BBC and IBA prohibiting the broadcasting of speech by representatives of proscribed terrorist organisations. The applicant journalists challenged the legality of the directives on the ground that they . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.139684

Darling (Pauper) v Gray and Sons: HL 31 May 1892

A workman died during the progress of an action of damages which he had brought against his employers for injuries sustained in their service, and his mother, as his executrix, was sisted as pursuer in the action. The mother afterwards brought an action of damages as an individual against her son’s employers for the loss caused to herself by the death of her son. Held; (aff judgment of the Second Division) that this second action was incompetent.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor, Lord Watson, Lord Herschell, Lord Morris, and Lord Field

Citations:

[1892] UKHL 910, 29 SLR 910

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.634556

Hague v British Telcommunications Plc (Immunotherapy : Reasonableness of Treatment : Private Dictionary Principle): QBD 12 Sep 2018

The parties disputed whether the defendant was liable to pay for private immunotherapy treatment for the plaintiff under the terms of an agreement settling the claimant’s action for damages for having contracted malignant pleural mesothelioma after working for the defendant.

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2227 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Contract, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.625530

Air France v Saks: 1985

(United States Supreme Court) The claimant suffered damage to and become permanently deaf in one ear as a result of pressurisation changes while the aircraft descended to land. The pressure system had worked normally. The airline said that the normal operation of a normal pressurisation system could not qualify as an article 17 accident.
Held: The text of the Convention implies that, however the word ‘accident’ is defined, it is the cause of the injury that must satisfy that definition rather than the occurrence of the injury alone. ‘We conclude that liability under Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention arises only if a passenger’s injury is caused by an unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger. This definition should be flexibly applied after assessment of all the circumstances surrounding a passenger’s injuries.’ and ‘But when the injury indisputably results from the passenger’s own internal reaction to the usual, normal, and expected operation of the aircraft, it has not been caused by an accident, and Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention cannot apply.’ and ‘Any injury is the product of a chain of causes, and we require only that the passenger be able to prove that some link in the chain was an unusual or unexpected event external to the passenger.’

Judges:

O’Connor J

Citations:

[1985] 470 US 392

Statutes:

Warsaw Convention 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Chaudhari v British Airways Plc CA 16-Apr-1997
The passenger injured himself as he fell from an aeroplane chair because of pre-existing injury.
Held: He had no claim under the Convention. The falling of a semi-paralysed person whilst he was trying to get to his feet to go to the lavatory . .
Cited – Morris v KLM Royal Dutch Airlines CA 17-May-2001
An unaccompanied female passenger aboard an aircraft was indecently assaulted. She suffered mental, but no physical, injury. She claimed damages against the airline under the Convention.
Held: The assault was a special risk inherent in air . .
Cited – Barclay v British Airways plc CC 27-Feb-2008
(Oxford County Court) The claimant slipped as she boarded an aircraft and sought damages for injuries to her knee. Her claim was brought under the Convention. The defendant denied that the injury occurred as the result of an accident, saying that an . .
Cited – Barclay v British Airways Plc CA 18-Dec-2008
The claimant sought damages for personal injury. The airline said that the injury was not the result of an accident within article 17.1. She was walking down the aisle and slipped.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The meaning of ‘accident’ . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Transport

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.182183

Maynard v West Midlands Regional Health Authority: HL 1985

The test of professional negligence is the standard of the ordinary skilled man exercising and professing to have that special skill. Lord Scarman said: ‘a doctor who professes to exercise a special skill must exercise the ordinary skill must exercise the ordinary skill of his specialty. Differences of opinion and practice exist, and will always exist, in the medical as in other professions. There is seldom any one answer exclusive of all others to problems of professional judgment. A court may prefer one body of opinion to another: but that is no basis for conclusion of negligence’.
As to evidence of what constitutes evidence of professional standards, Lord Scarman said: ‘A judge’s ‘preference’ for one body of distinguished professional opinion to another also professionally distinguished is not sufficient to establish negligence in a practitioner whose actions have received the seal of approval of those whose opinions, truthfully expressed, honestly held, were not preferred. If this was the real reason for the judge’s finding, he erred in law even though elsewhere in his judgment he stated the law correctly. For in the realm of diagnosis and treatment negligence is not established by preferring one respectable body of professional opinion to another. Failure to exercise the ordinary skill of a doctor (in the appropriate speciality, if he be a specialist) is necessary.’
Lord Scarman said: ‘A case which is based on an allegation that a fully considered decision of two consultants in the field of their special skill was negligent clearly presents certain difficulties of proof. It is not enough to show that there is a body of competent professional opinion which considers that theirs was a wrong decision, if there also exists a body of professional opinion, equally competent, which supports the decision as reasonable in the circumstances. It is not enough to show that subsequent events show that the operation need never have been performed, if at the time the decision to operate was taken it was reasonable in the sense that a responsible body of medical opinion would have accepted it as proper.’

Judges:

Lord Scarman

Citations:

[1985] 1 WLR 685, [1985] 1 All ER 635

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Bolam v Friern Hospital Management Committee QBD 1957
Professional to use Skilled Persons Ordinary Care
Negligence was alleged against a doctor.
Held: McNair J directed the jury: ‘Where some special skill is exercised, the test for negligence is not the test of the man on the Clapham omnibus, because he has not got this special skill. The test . .
Adopted – Hunter v Hanley 4-Feb-1955
The pursuer had been injured when the hypodermic needle being used by the defender doctor broke in use. The pursuer said that the direction by the judge as to accepted practice for the use of such needles.
Held: The court considered the . .
Cited – Joyce v Yeomans CA 1981
The court discussed how an appellate court should defer to the assessment of a judge at first instance of the value of an expert witness.
Brandon LJ said: ‘even when dealing with expert witnesses, a trial judge has an advantage over an . .

Cited by:

Cited – Mirza v Birmingham Health Authority QBD 31-Jul-2001
The claimant had undergone heart surgery as an infant in 1976, and claimed damages for professional negligence. The procedure involved a dangerous procedure, a resection of coarctation. As a consequence, the Claimant suffered a number of problems . .
Cited – Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1997
The plaintiff suffered catastrophic brain damage as a result of cardiac arrest induced by respiratory failure as a child whilst at the defendant hospital. A doctor was summoned but failed to attend, and the child suffered cardiac arrest and brain . .
Cited – Chester v Afshar HL 14-Oct-2004
The claimant suffered back pain for which she required neurosurgery. The operation was associated with a 1-2% risk of the cauda equina syndrome, of which she was not warned. She went ahead with the surgery, and suffered that complication. The . .
Cited – Penney and Others v East Kent Health Authority CA 16-Nov-1999
A cervical smear screener could be liable in negligence if he failed to spot obvious abnormalities in a test result which indicated that further investigation was required. To say this is not to say that such screening tests were expected to achieve . .
Cited – Maguire v North West Strategic Health Authority QBD 16-Nov-2012
The claimant General Practitioner doctor had been found liable for professional negligence leading to very severe injury. He now sought a contribution from the Authority, saying that their similar mistake within a few days had similarly caused the . .
Cited – Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board SC 11-Mar-2015
Change in Doctors’ Information Obligations
The pursuer claimed that her obstetrician had been negligent, after her son suffered severe injury at birth. The baby faced a birth with shoulder dystocia – the inability of the shoulders to pass through the pelvis. The consultant considered that a . .
Cited – Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
Explanation of Medical Risks essential
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 28 May 2022; Ref: scu.183056