Category: Personal Injury

Bussey v 00654701 Ltd: CA 22 Feb 2018

Appeal by the widow of a man who died from mesothelioma against the dismissal of her fatal accident claim, particularly as to whether, given the relatively low level of exposure to asbestos and the state of knowledge in the late 1960s, the defendant was under a duty to take protective measures.
Held: Her appeal succeeded. The judge had wrongly concluded that the CA had made Technical Data Note 13 as a universal test of foreseeability in mesothelioma cases. It was not.

Judges:

Jackson, Underhill LJJ

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 243, [2018] WLR(D) 120

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605781

Corstorphine (An Infant) v Liverpool City Council: CA 26 Feb 2018

Application of the qualified one-way costs shifting (‘QOCS’) regime in CPR 44.13 to 44.17 in respect of an unsuccessful claim by the Appellant for damages for personal injury.

Citations:

[2018] EWCA Civ 270, [2018] WLR(D) 118

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.605624

Wink v Croatio Osiguranje Dd: QBD 3 May 2013

The meaning of ‘damage . . sustained within the jurisdiction’ in the jurisdiction ‘gateway’ under Ground 9(a) of paragraph 3.1(9) of CPR PD 6B ‘Claims in Tort’.

Judges:

Haddon-Cave J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 1118 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Jurisdiction, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.601872

The English Electric Company Ltd v Alstom UK: QBD 10 Jul 2017

The clamant had been found liable for malignant mesothelioma incurred by a former employee. It now sought a contribution or indemnity from another former employer.

Judges:

Waksman QC HHJ

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1748 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Company

Updated: 05 April 2022; Ref: scu.589919

London Organising Committee of The Olympic and Paralympic Games (Locog) v Sinfield: QBD 22 Jan 2018

The defendant had applied for the claimant’s claim against it to be sruck out under the 2015 Act, alleging a dishonest claim for expenses. It now appealed from rejection of that claim.
Held: THe appeaL succeeded: ‘The starting point is s 57(3). As I have explained, it follows from this provision that something more is required than the mere loss of damages to which the claimant is entitled to establish substantial injustice. Parliament has provided that the default position is that a fundamentally dishonest claimant should lose his damages in their entirety, even though ex hypothesi, by s 57(1), he is properly entitled to some damages. It would render superfluous s 57(3) if the mere loss of genuine damages could constitute substantial injustice. The judge made no findings capable of supporting a conclusion that if the whole claim was dismissed it would result in substantial injustice to Mr Sinfield Furthermore, the judge was wrong to characterise the gardening claim as peripheral. As I have explained, as originally presented, it was a very substantial part of the claim.’
‘Given the infinite variety of circumstances which might arise, I prefer not to try and be prescriptive as to what sort of facts might satisfy the test of substantial injustice. However, it seems to me plain that substantial injustice must mean more than the mere fact that the claimant will lose his damages for those heads of claim that are not tainted with dishonesty. That must be so because of s 57(3). Parliament plainly intended that sub-section to be punitive and to operate as a deterrent. It was enacted so that claimants who are tempted to dishonestly exaggerate their claims know that if they do, and they are discovered, the default position is that they will lose their entire damages. It seems to me that it would effectively neuter the effect of s 57(3) if dishonest claimants were able to retain their ‘honest’ damages by pleading substantial injustice on the basis of the loss of those damages per se. What will generally be required is some substantial injustice arising as a consequence of the loss of those damages’

Judges:

Jukian Knowles J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 51 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 57

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.603727

Four Seasons Holdings Incorporated v Brownlie: SC 19 Dec 2017

The claimant and her family were in a car crash while on holiday in Egypt. The claimant’s husband and his daughter died. The holiday had been booked in England and the car excursion booked in advance from England. The hotel operator was incorporated in Canada, and denied that the English court had jurisdiction. Each party appealed against a judgment allowing service under the contract and 1976 Act claim, but disallowing it under the 1934 Act claim and for her own personal injuries.
Held: The Hotel company’s appeal succeeded. The negligence was governed by the law of Egypt, and the 1976 Act applied only to a tort not governed by English law. The Rome II Regulation dealt with applicable law, not jurisdiction, and could not support her claims.
The claimant had failed to bring her claims within the jurisdictional gateways which would allow service, and had not established that a viable claim existed. The Hotel had proved not to be owned by the appellant company, and any claim in contract against it must fail. On the one hand she pleaded that the contract was ‘made within the jurisdiction’ and on the other that the damage was ‘sustained within the jurisdiction’.
In determining an issue about jurisdiction, the traditional test has been whether the claimant had ‘the better of the argument’ on the facts going to jurisdiction. The Court restated that test: ‘ the claimant must supply a plausible evidential basis for the application of a relevant jurisdictional gateway; (ii) that if there is an issue of fact about it, or some other reason for doubting whether it applies, the court must take a view on the material available if it can reliably do so; but (iii) the nature of the issue and the limitations of the material available at the interlocutory stage may be such that no reliable assessment can be made, in which case there is a good arguable case for the application of the gateway if there is a plausible (albeit contested) evidential basis for it.’

Judges:

Lady Hale, Lord Clarke, Lord Wilson, Lord Sumption, Lord Hughes

Citations:

[2017] UKSC 80, [2018] 1 WLR 192, [2018] 2 All ER 91, UKSC 2016/0045, UKSC 2015/0175

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary, SC 2017 May 09 am Video, SC 2017 May 09 pm Video, SC 2017 Jul 20 am Video, SC 2017 Jul 20 pm Video

Statutes:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934, Fatal Accidents Act 1976, Regulation (EC) 84/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Mentioned – Malik v Narodni Banka Ceskoslovenska 1946
(Orse Malik v National Bank of Czechoslovakia) The evidential standard for establishing that one of the jurisdictional gateways applied was the civil burden of proof. . .
Cited – Vitkovice Horni a Hutni Tezirstvo v Korner HL 1951
The ordinary principles of international comity were invaded when courts permitted service out of jurisdiction and that the courts should therefore approach with circumspection any application for leave to serve a foreigner out of the jurisdiction. . .
At CA – Brownlie v Four Seasons Holdings Incorporated CA 3-Jul-2015
The claimant commenced an action here after suffering injury whilst in Egypt on an excursion organised under the control of the defendant. The defendant denied jurisdiction as regards the damage suffered.
Held: The defendant’s appeal was . .
Cited – Entores Ltd v Miles Far East Corporation CA 1955
The plaintiff traded from London, and telexed an offer to purchase cathodes to a company in Holland, who signified their acceptance by return, again by telex. Entores later wanted to sue the defendant, the parent company of the Dutch party. It was . .
Cited – Seaconsar Far East Ltd v Bank Markazi Jomhouri Islami Iran HL 15-Oct-1993
A plaintiff must show that there is a ‘serious issue for trial’ to support and justify an application for overseas service. The standard of proof in respect of the cause of action relied on is whether, on the evidence, there was a serious question . .
Cited – Egon Oldendorff v Libera Corporation 1996
Conflict of laws – ‘It is sufficient to say that the party relying upon art. 3 must demonstrate with reasonable certainty that the parties have chosen a particular law as the governing or applicable law. ‘ . .
Cited – Canada Trust Company and others v Stolzenberg and others (2) CA 29-Oct-1997
The court looked at questions relating to domicile and jurisdiction; standard of proof, date to be determined and duties before service.
Held: The court is endeavouring to find an imprecise concept which reflects that the plaintiff must . .
Cited – Canada Trust Co and Others v Stolzenberg and Others (No 2) HL 12-Oct-2000
The plaintiffs alleged the involvement of the defendant in a conspiracy to defraud. He had been domiciled in England, but had moved to Germany. He denied that the UK court had jurisdiction. The court of appeal said that jurisdiction was determined . .
Cited – Bols Distilleries VB (T/A As Bols Royal Distilleries) and Another v Superior Yacht Services Ltd PC 11-Oct-2006
(Gilbraltar) The parties disputed the management contract for a racing yacht, and also the juridiction of the Supreme Court of Gibraltar to hear the case. Bols said that under regulation 2(1) Gibraltar had no jurisdiction.
Held: The English . .
Cited – British Arab Commercial Bank Plc v Bank of Communications and Another ComC 17-Feb-2011
Blair J said: ‘It is not in dispute that, . . it must be a ‘real choice’ which the parties had a clear intention to make. A tacit choice must only be found where it is reasonably clear that it is a genuine choice by the parties (See Clarke J’s . .
Cited – Adams v Lindsell KBD 5-Jun-1818
No Contract by Post until Acceptance Received
The defendant sent his offer of wool for sale to the plaintiff by post. The plaintiff’s acceptance was at first misdirected. Before receiving the reply the defendant had sold the wool elsewhere, but this was only after he would have received the . .
At first Instance – Brownlie v Four Seasons Holdings Incorporated QBD 19-Feb-2014
The claimant and her husband had been in a car crash while on holiday in Egypt. The tour was booked in London. The defendant denied jurisdiction. . .
Cited – VTB Capital Plc v Nutritek International Corp and Others SC 6-Feb-2013
The claimant bank said that it had been induced to create very substantial lending facilities by fraudulent misrepresentation by the defendants. They now appealed against findings that England was not clearly or distinctly the appropriate forum for . .
Cited – Cox v Ergo Versicherung Ag CA 25-Jun-2012
The deceased member of the armed forces had died in a road traffic accident in Germany. The parties didputed whether the principles governing the calculation of damages were those in the 1976 Act and UK law, or under German law.
Held: ‘There . .
Cited – Dunlop v Higgins HL 24-Feb-1848
Contracts made by post are complete when and where the letter of acceptance is posted.
Lord Cottenham LC said that the explanation for the contract arising was that there was a usage of trade to accept a postal offer by post. The Post Office . .
Cited – Wong Mee Administratrix of The Estate of Ho Shui Yee, Deceased v Kwan Kin Travel Services Ltd, China Travel Services Co (Zhong Shan) And, Pak Tang Lake Travel Services Co (Doumen County) Co PC 6-Nov-1995
The appellant’s daughter died in an accident whilst on holiday in China from Hong Kong on a trip booked with the respondent.
Held: Lord Slynn said: ‘ . . the issue is thus whether . . [the package tour operator] undertook no more than that . .
Cited – Chandler v Cape Plc CA 25-Apr-2012
. .
Cited – AK Investment CJSC v Kyrgyz Mobil Tel Ltd and Others PC 10-Mar-2011
Developing Law – Summary Procedures Very Limited
(Isle of Man) (‘Altimo’) The parties were all based in Kyrgyzstan, but the claimant sought a remedy in the Isle of Man which would be unavailable in Kyrgyzstan.
Held: Lord Collins said: ‘The general rule is that it is not normally appropriate . .
Cited – Moran v First Choice Holidays QBD 2005
. .
Cited – Parker v Tui UK Ltd CA 27-Nov-2009
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Goldman Sachs International v Novo Banco SA SC 4-Jul-2018
A banking facility was provided under a contract applying English law and jurisdiction. The parties now disputed whether on an assignment the dispute was to be resolved under Portuguese law.
Held: Recognition in the United Kingdom of measures . .
See Also – Brownlie v Four Seasons Holdings Inc QBD 1-Oct-2019
Application to substitute defendant. . .
Cited – Soleymani v Nifty Gateway Llc ComC 24-Mar-2022
The claimant sought declaratory relief as to the basis of a purchase after he placed a bid for a blockchain-based non-fungible token (also known as an NFT) associated with an artwork by the artist known as Beeple titled ‘Abundance’. The court was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Jurisdiction, European

Updated: 03 April 2022; Ref: scu.601508

Wilson v Best Travel Ltd: 1993

The Greek hotel at which the plaintiff stayed had glass patio doors fitted with ordinary glass, not safety glass, of 5mm thickness, which complied with Greek but not with British safety standards, which would have required the use of safety glass. The plaintiff sought damages after falling through the glass.
Held: The claim failed.
Phillips J said: ‘What is the duty of a tour operator in a situation such as this? Must he refrain from sending holidaymakers to any hotel whose characteristics, in so far as safety is concerned, fail to satisfy the standards which apply in this country? I do not believe that his obligations in respect of the safety of his clients can extend this far. Save where uniform international regulations apply, there are bound to be differences in the safety standards applied in respect of the many hazards of modern life between one country and another. All civilised countries attempt to cater for these hazards by imposing mandatory regulations. The duty of care of a tour operator is likely to extend to checking that local safety regulations are complied with. Provided that they are, I do not consider that the tour operator owes a duty to boycott a hotel because of the absence of some safety feature which would be found in an English hotel unless the absence of such a feature might lead a reasonable holidaymaker to decline to take a holiday at the hotel in question. On the facts of this case I do not consider that the degree of danger posed by the absence of safety glass in the doors of the Vanninarchis Beach Hotel called for any action on the part of the defendants pursuant to their duty to exercise reasonable care to ensure the safety of their clients.’

Judges:

Phillips J

Citations:

[1993] 1 All ER 353

Statutes:

Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982 13

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Lougheed v On The Beach Ltd CA 27-Nov-2014
‘Standards of maintenance and cleanliness vary as between countries and continents and indeed what is reasonably to be expected in a five star hotel in a Western European capital differs from what is reasonably to be expected in a safari lodge, . .
Cited – TUI UK Ltd v Morgan ChD 9-Nov-2020
Tour Co Responsible For injury – Standards Applied
The claimant suffered an injury tripping at a hotel on a package holiday. The company now appealed.
Held: The appeal was refused. A term will generally be implied into a contract for services by operation of law (the 1982 Act s 13) to the . .
Cited – Morgan v TUI UK Ltd Misc 12-Jun-2020
The claimant as injured walking back along a terrace on a holiday put together by the defendant package holiday company.
Held: The claim succeeded. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.655633

Morgan v TUI UK Ltd: Misc 12 Jun 2020

The claimant as injured walking back along a terrace on a holiday put together by the defendant package holiday company.
Held: The claim succeeded.

Judges:

Jarman QC HHJ

Citations:

[2020] EW Misc 6 (CC)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wilson v Best Travel Ltd 1993
The Greek hotel at which the plaintiff stayed had glass patio doors fitted with ordinary glass, not safety glass, of 5mm thickness, which complied with Greek but not with British safety standards, which would have required the use of safety glass. . .

Cited by:

Cited – TUI UK Ltd v Morgan ChD 9-Nov-2020
Tour Co Responsible For injury – Standards Applied
The claimant suffered an injury tripping at a hotel on a package holiday. The company now appealed.
Held: The appeal was refused. A term will generally be implied into a contract for services by operation of law (the 1982 Act s 13) to the . .
Appeal from – TUI UK Ltd v Morgan ChD 9-Nov-2020
Tour Co Responsible For injury – Standards Applied
The claimant suffered an injury tripping at a hotel on a package holiday. The company now appealed.
Held: The appeal was refused. A term will generally be implied into a contract for services by operation of law (the 1982 Act s 13) to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.655642

Docherty and Others v The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills: SCS 21 Mar 2018

The House was asked: ‘Where a man, while working in Scotland, inhales asbestos fibres that cause injury to his body after he has become resident in England, which law is applicable to determine the admissibility of claims for damages made by his executors and relatives after his death?’

Citations:

[2018] ScotCS CSOH – 25

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Jurisdiction

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.609346

Saunders v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 23 Feb 2018

The Claimant seeks damages for personal injury and consequential losses arising out of alleged clinical negligence during surgery to reverse an ileostomy at Trafford General Hospital in March 2012.

Judges:

Yip J

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 343 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Professional Negligence

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.605797

Petroleum Company of Trinidad and Tobago Ltd v Ryan and Another: PC 19 Oct 2017

(From the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago) The company appealed from a finding that it was liable for personal injuries suffered by neighbours to a disused oil well suffered it was said from fumes from the well.
Held: The appal succeeded. There had infact been no evidence to support the finding that the well was causative of the injuries suffered.

Judges:

Lady Hale, Lord Kerr, Lord Wilson, Lord Carnwath, Lord Hughes

Citations:

[2017] UKPC 30

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Commonwealth

Nuisance, Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 01 April 2022; Ref: scu.598627

Lougheed v On The Beach Ltd: CA 27 Nov 2014

‘Standards of maintenance and cleanliness vary as between countries and continents and indeed what is reasonably to be expected in a five star hotel in a Western European capital differs from what is reasonably to be expected in a safari lodge, however well appointed. There may perhaps be certain irreducible standards in relation to life threatening risks, but to expect uniformity of approach on a matter such as the frequency of inspection and cleaning of floor surfaces is unrealistic.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Tomlinson

Citations:

[2014] EWCA Civ 1538

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

The Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Wilson v Best Travel Ltd 1993
The Greek hotel at which the plaintiff stayed had glass patio doors fitted with ordinary glass, not safety glass, of 5mm thickness, which complied with Greek but not with British safety standards, which would have required the use of safety glass. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.539339

Wong Mee Administratrix of The Estate of Ho Shui Yee, Deceased v Kwan Kin Travel Services Ltd, China Travel Services Co (Zhong Shan) And, Pak Tang Lake Travel Services Co (Doumen County) Co: PC 6 Nov 1995

The appellant’s daughter died in an accident whilst on holiday in China from Hong Kong on a trip booked with the respondent.
Held: Lord Slynn said: ‘ . . the issue is thus whether . . [the package tour operator] undertook no more than that they would arrange for services to be provided by others as their agents (where the law would imply a term into the contract that they would use reasonable care and skill in selecting those other persons) or whether they themselves undertook to supply the services when, subject to any exemption clause, there would be implied into the contract a term that they would as suppliers carry out the services with reasonable care and skill . . ‘

Judges:

Lord Slynn

Citations:

[1995] UKPC 42, [1995] CLC 1593, [1996] 1 WLR 38

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stewart v Reavell’s Garage QBD 7-Apr-1952
Car repairers were held liable for damage to a car which became out of control and crashed, following faulty brake repairs even though the faulty work had been done by their subcontractor brake liner and the customer had consented to the repairers . .

Cited by:

Cited – Four Seasons Holdings Incorporated v Brownlie SC 19-Dec-2017
The claimant and her family were in a car crash while on holiday in Egypt. The claimant’s husband and his daughter died. The holiday had been booked in England and the car excursion booked in advance from England. The hotel operator was incorporated . .
Cited – TUI UK Ltd v Morgan ChD 9-Nov-2020
Tour Co Responsible For injury – Standards Applied
The claimant suffered an injury tripping at a hotel on a package holiday. The company now appealed.
Held: The appeal was refused. A term will generally be implied into a contract for services by operation of law (the 1982 Act s 13) to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.442354

Wright v Stoddard International Plc and Another (No 2): SCS 23 Oct 2007

(Supplementary Opinion) Lord Uist applied the decision in Rothwell, although on the facts he would not have awarded damages anyway.

Judges:

Lord Uist

Citations:

[2007] ScotCS CSOH – 173, 2008 RepLR 37

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

See Also – Wright v Stoddard International Plc and Another SCS 2-Aug-2007
. .
Applied – Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar HL 17-Oct-2007
The claimant sought damages for the development of neural plaques, having been exposed to asbestos while working for the defendant. The presence of such plaques were symptomless, and would not themselves cause other asbestos related disease, but . .

Cited by:

Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SCS 8-Jan-2010
The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2009 Act by judicial review. The Act would make their insured and themselves liable to very substantial unanticipated claims for damages for pleural plaques which would not previousl or otherwise . .
Cited – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SC 12-Oct-2011
Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR
The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.259996

Evans v Kosmar Villa Holidays Plc: CA 23 Oct 2007

The claimant sought damages from the tour operator after he suffered a head injury resulting in incomplete tetraplegia after diving into a shallow swimming pool in the early hours of the morning in a resort in Greece while on a tour run by the defendant.
Held: The defendants’ duty of care did not extend to a duty to guard the claimant against the risk of diving into the shallow end of a pool and injuring himself. That was an obvious risk of which he was well aware.
Richards LJ said: ‘but the core of the reasoning in Tomlinson, as in earlier cases such as Ratcliffe v McConnell [1999] 1 WLR 670 was that people should accept responsibility for the risks they choose to run and that there should be no duty to protect them against obvious risks (subject to Lord Hoffmann’s qualification as to cases where there is no genuine and informed choice or there is some lack of capacity). That reasoning was held to apply not only to trespassers but also to lawful visitors to whom there is owed the common duty of care under section 2(2) of the Occupiers Liability Act 1957 . . I do not see why the reasoning should not also apply to persons to whom there is owed a duty of care in similar terms under a contract of the kind that existed in this case . . Applying that approach here, Kosmar’s duty of care did not extend, in my judgment, to a duty to guard the claimant against the risk of his diving into the pool and injuring himself. That was an obvious risk, of which he was well aware. Although just under 18 years of age, he was of full capacity and was able to make a genuine and informed choice. He was not even seriously affected by drink.’

Judges:

Arden LJ, Hooper LJ, Richards LJ

Citations:

[2007] EWCA Civ 1003, [2007] NPC 109, [2008] PIQR P7, [2008] 1 All ER 530, [2008] 1 WLR 297, [2008] 1 All ER (Comm) 721

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Kosmar Villa Holidays Plc v the Trustees of Syndicate 1243 ComC 4-Apr-2007
The tour company had lost an action for personal injury by a young man injured on holiday with them in Greece, and now sought an indemnity from its insurers. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Portsmouth Youth Activities Committee (A Charity) v Poppleton CA 12-Jun-2008
The claimant was injured climbing without ropes (‘bouldering’) at defendant’s activity centre. The defendant appealed against a finding of 25% responsibility in having failed to warn climbers that the existence of thick foam would not remove all . .
Cited – Geary v JD Wetherspoon Plc QBD 14-Jun-2011
The claimant, attempting to slide down the banisters at the defendants’ premises, fell 4 metres suffering severe injury. She claimed in negligence and occupiers’ liability. The local council had waived a requirement that the balustrade meet the . .
Cited – TUI UK Ltd v Morgan ChD 9-Nov-2020
Tour Co Responsible For injury – Standards Applied
The claimant suffered an injury tripping at a hotel on a package holiday. The company now appealed.
Held: The appeal was refused. A term will generally be implied into a contract for services by operation of law (the 1982 Act s 13) to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.260035

Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte Kavanagh and others: Admn 30 Jul 1998

The fact that the care received by a child, whose mother had been murdered, was equivalent to the care received from the mother should be disregarded when calculating loss of mother’s care.

Citations:

Times 25-Aug-1998, Gazette 16-Sep-1998, [1998] EWHC Admin 801

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Hayden v Hayden CA 1992
The claimant’s mother died in a car accident caused by the father. The father then took over the mother’s role in caring for the claimant.
Held: Those services, and compensation awarded to provide for them, were not a benefit accruing as a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 31 March 2022; Ref: scu.138922

Zeromska-Smith v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust: QBD 16 Apr 2019

The Claimant seeks damages for psychiatric injury arising out of the stillbirth of her daughter. Breach of duty is admitted, as is some damage arising out of the breach of duty. In those circumstances, judgment has been entered for the Claimant and the trial has concerned the extent of the damage caused and the quantification of the claim.

Judges:

Martin Spencer J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 980 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Zeromska-Smith v United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust QBD 8-Mar-2019
The Claimant sought damages for psychiatric injury arising out of the stillbirth of her daughter, and contended that if distressing details about the stillbirth and her subsequent mental illness were publicly reported, then that would further damage . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 30 March 2022; Ref: scu.636177

Thomas v Hugh James Ford Simey Solicitors: CA 4 Sep 2017

Appeal by a claimant against the dismissal of his action against former solicitors for professional negligence. The point of principle which arises is whether solicitors acting in a high volume, fixed costs scheme for low value personal injury cases, are under a duty to advise about heads of claim which the client has said he does not wish to pursue and for which he says that he cannot provide supporting evidence.
Held: The appeal failed.

Judges:

Jackson, Henderson LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 1303

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.593147

Harvey v Singer Manufacturing Co: SCS 18 Dec 1959

The pursuer claimed reparation from the Singer Manufacturing Company, Limited, for personal injuries which he sustained in their employment

Citations:

[1959] ScotCS CSIH – 2

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Devine v Colvilles Ltd HL 11-Mar-1969
The House considered the position of the doctrine of res ipsa loquitir. The plaintiff had been injured falling or jumping from a raised platform.
Held: The claim succeeded. ‘ I hold it proved that there was a general panic. Now the defenders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 29 March 2022; Ref: scu.279458

Singh v The City of Cardiff Council: QBD 23 Jun 2017

The clamant sought damages ahving been injured falling from a footbridge.
Held: ‘The injuries were not caused by any failure to maintain the highway and the claimant’s claim under the 1980 Act fails. The claimant’s injuries were not the result of any failure by the defendant to take reasonable care to ensure that he was reasonably safe in using the land adjacent to the footpath and there was no breach of the duty imposed by section 2 of the 1958 Act. The defendant is not liable at common law for any negligence in relation to the injuries that the claimant sustained. For those reasons, the claim does not succeed.’

Judges:

Lewis J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1499 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupier’s Liability Act 1957 2, Highways Act 1980 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Land

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.589915

PT Civil Engineering v Davies: QBD 30 Jun 2017

Appeal by PT Civil Engineering against a decision giving judgment for the claimant, in his claim for damages for personal injuries against the appellant. D was driving a vehicle owned by the defendant. A fire erupted in the vehicle causing D and the two passengers in the vehicle, to leap from the moving vehicle. D sustained injuries and brought a claim for damages alleging negligence on the part of the vehicle owners. The judge had found no cause of the fire.

Judges:

Lewsi J

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 1651 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.589912

Dodd v Raebarn Estates Ltd and Others: CA 21 Jun 2017

The court considered which of several layers of landlord was ultimately responsible in law for damages to an occupant under the 1972 Act.

Judges:

McFalane, Lewison, McCombe LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 439

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Defective Premises Act 1972

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Landlord and Tenant

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588321

Baker v KTM Sportmotorcycle UK Ltd and Another: CA 3 May 2017

The claimant was riding a motorcycle constructed by the appellant. The front brakes seized, and he was badly injured. KTM now challenged a finding that the galvanic corrosion which led to the seizure was a fault within the 1987 Act.
Held: The appeal failed. The recorder had identified the relevant issues and the evidence before him supported his conclusion.

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 378

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Act 1987 3(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 27 March 2022; Ref: scu.588197

Russell v Rudd: HL 20 Mar 1923

Weekly payments of 35s. each were made for six months to a workman injured by an accident arising out of and in the course of his employment. Thereafter the workman and his employers entered into an agreement for the payment of a lump sum of pounds 75 in discharge of all claims in respect of the accident. The Registrar, on the ground of the inadequacy of the sum agreed on, refused to record the memorandum which had been forwarded to him. The employers having thereafter stopped the weekly payment, the workman, who had not accepted the pounds 75, commenced arbitration proceedings, in the course of which the decision of the County Court Judge refusing to record the memorandum as inadequate was reversed by the Court of Appeal. The workman appealed to the House of Lords. Held, ( diss. Lord Carson) that to enter into an agreement to discharge all claims under the Act for a lump sum except that to a weekly payment or the liability therefor is to contract out of the Act; that the agreement in question could be sustained as an agreement for the redemption of a weekly payment by a lump sum within the meaning of Schedule I (17) and Schedule II (9) and (10), it being reasonably capable of that construction, and that it might therefore be objected to by the Registrar.
The English decisions reviewed and overruled.
Burns v. William Baird and Company, Limited (1913 S.C. 358, 50 S.L.R. 280) and William Baird and Company, Limited v. Ancient Order of Foresters (1914 S.C. 965, 51 S.L.R. 819), approved.
Per Lord Shaw-‘There may be an agreement between an employer and workman for redemption of a weekly payment, not only in the case where there had first been an agreed-on weekly payment prior to the redemption, but also in the case where there was simply the liability under the statute to make a weekly payment.

Judges:

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

Citations:

[1923] UKHL 43 – 1, 61 SLR 43 – 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.633256

Hendry (Simpson’s Executrix) v The United Collieries Ltd: HL 24 Jun 1909

Where a workman meets his death through accident arising out of and in the course of his employment a right to compensation from his employer is by the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906 conferred upon his dependants, which vests in them on his death, and is, subject of course always to the restrictions of the Act, transmitted on their death to their personal representatives, notwithstanding that during their lifetime they may have made no claim- diss. Lord Dunedin.
Observations on the scope of the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lord Macnaghten, Lord James Of Hereford, Lord Dunedin, and Lord Shaw Of Dunfermline

Citations:

[1909] UKHL 780, 46 SLR 780

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.620582

Moore v Manchester Liners Ltd: HL 18 Jul 1910

A seaman was lawfully absent from his ship for the purposes of buying clothing and of recreation. On returning, he fell from the ladder on the ship’s side and was drowned.
Held that the accident arose out of and in the course of his employment, and that the shipowners were liable to pay compensation to his dependant under the Workmen’s Compensation Act.
Per Lord Chancellor-‘An accident befalls a man ‘in the course of’ his employment if it occurs while he is doing what a man so employed may reasonably do, within a time during which he is employed, and at a place where he may reasonably be during that time to do that thing.’

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Ashbourne, Macnaghten, James of Hereford, and Mersey

Citations:

[1910] UKHL 709

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.619799

Marshall v Owners of SS ‘Wild Rose’: HL 11 Jul 1910

While a ship was in harbour a seaman employed on board left his berth and went on deck during a hot night, saying that he was going up for fresh air. Next day his drowned body was found in the water just underneath a part of the ship’s rail where the crew habitually sat. There was no further evidence to explain the drowning.
Held ( diss. the Lord Chancellor and Lord James of Hereford) that, assuming the death had occurred by accident, there was not evidence to support the inference that the accident arose out of the employment.

Judges:

Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords James of Hereford, Atkinson. Shaw, and Mersey.

Citations:

[1910] UKHL 701, 48 SLR 701

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.619798

Hargreave v Haughead Coal Co Ltd: HL 12 Mar 1912

A miner was injured by accident arising out of and in the course of his employment, and as the result lost one eye. His employers for a time paid him compensation for total incapacity. They applied for review of the compensation, and the arbiter ended it, finding that the miner’s incapacity had ceased. He also found that the miner had incipient cataract in the other eye, that incapacity would result gradually from the cataract, and that the cataract was not due to the accident.
Held, affirming judgment of the Second Division, that the arbiter was right in ending the compensation.

Judges:

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

Citations:

[1912] UKHL 474, 49 SLR 474

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1906

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury

Updated: 26 March 2022; Ref: scu.619235

Hamid v Khalid: CA 31 Mar 2017

Appeal against order rejecting allegation of fraud in road traffic collision case.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge dealt with the evidence in sufficient detail to justify the conclusion which she reached, and without any unfairness to the Insurers. There is also an issue of proportionality in play: ‘Without detracting in any way from the principles stated by this court in Harb, it would I think be unrealistic to apply them with the same stringency to a relatively low value road traffic accident case in the County Court as to a multi-million pound claim in the High Court to enforce an alleged oral contract made in most unusual circumstances with a member of the Saudi royal family.’

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 201

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581340

Elson v Stilgoe: CA 30 Mar 2017

Appeal from dismissal of claim for personal injuries in road traffic accident.
Held: The appeal failed: ‘the effect of the judge’s findings is that the claimant was not on the defendant’s side of the road for any length time sufficient for him to be observed by the defendant in a way which required him to take some evasive action. The judge’s findings present a picture of a defendant driving properly, confronted at the last moment by a claimant who had made a decision to veer into his path without good reason for doing so. The clear implication of findings made by the judge was that in the circumstances there was no reasonable ground for asserting that the driver should have taken account of the possibility of a sudden veering into his path without good reason by the claimant. The judge’s conclusions appear to me to show that the sole cause of the accident was the claimant’s actions rather than any action or inaction of the defendant.’

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 193

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581337

Maylin v Dacorum Sports Trust (T/A XC Sportspace): QBD 9 Mar 2017

Claim for damages after injury climbing at a facility operated by the defendants.
Held: The claim failed: ‘The Participation Statement at the top of the Disclaimer, which, on any view, that the Claimant accepted that she had read, makes it plain that climbing is an activity with a danger of personal injury or death. Moreover as Miss Dabbs made clear in her evidence, which was not seriously challenged, and which I accept, there were at least two notices warning users of the bouldering wall that matting did not make it any safer and at least one notice that spelt out that broken or sprained limbs are common. These were located on both sides of the entrance to the bouldering area and were there to be seen, whether or not the Claimant in fact read them. The mere fact that the Defendant could have done more by perhaps having a receptionist spell out the risks verbally or by handing out a photocopy of the notice warning of the risks and that the mat did not make it any safer is nothing to the point if the steps which were taken were themselves sufficient, as I find they were.’

Judges:

McKenna QC HHJ

Citations:

[2017] EWHC 378 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 24 March 2022; Ref: scu.581315

Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority v First Tier Tribunal and Another: CA 14 Mar 2017

(Social Entitlement Chamber) (Criminal Injuries Compensation) How broad is the definition of those who can properly describe themselves as victims who have sustained personal injuries in and directly attributable to a crime of violence?

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 139

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.580891

Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Ltd: CA 12 Jan 2022

Explosive Pellet Use Not Within Employee’s Role.

The claimant worked on a site operated by the respondent. One of the respondent’s employees exploded two pellet targets injuring the claimant’s hearing. He asserted vicarious liability in the respondent. There had been tensions between the claimant and the respondent’s own staff. The judge found that the use of the pellets was not within the range of duties assigned to the respondent’s employees, and that they were therefore not responsible.
Held: The appeal failed. The parties did not challenge the judge’s analysis of the law. On the facts: ‘ the careful and detailed findings of fact made by the judge, unchallenged by the appellant, are fatal to this appeal. What they demonstrate is that there was not a sufficiently close connection between the act which caused the injury and the work of Mr H so as to make it fair, just and reasonable to impose vicarious liability on Tarmac.’ The pellet was not part of the respondent’s equipment, and nor was it part of his work to use it. No supervisory role existed.
‘In order to succeed on the alleged breach of the employer’s duty of care, it must be shown that there was a reasonably foreseeable risk of injury to the appellant by reason of the actions of Mr Heath. It is accepted that horseplay, ill-discipline and malice could provide a mechanism for causing such a reasonably foreseeable risk but, in my view, it is not made out on the facts of this case.’

Judges:

Lady Justice Nicola Davies
Lady Justice Simler
And
Lord Justice William Davis

Citations:

[2022] EWCA Civ 7

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jacobi v Griffiths 17-Jun-1999
(Canadian Supreme Court) The process for determining when a non-authorised act by an employee is so connected to the employer’s enterprise that liability should be imposed involved two steps: 1. Firstly a court should determine whether there are . .
Cited – Cox v Ministry of Justice SC 2-Mar-2016
The claimant was working in a prison supervising working prisoners. One of them dropped a bag of rice on her causing injury. At the County Curt, the prisoner was found negligence in the prisoner, but not the appellant for vicarious liability. The . .
Cited – Bazley v Curry 17-Jun-1999
(Canadian Supreme Court) The court considerd the doctrine of vicarious liability: ‘The policy purposes underlying the imposition of vicarious liability on employers are served only where the wrong is so connected with the employment that it can be . .
Cited – Mohamud v WM Morrison Supermarkets plc SC 2-Mar-2016
The claimant had been assaulted and racially abused as he left a kiosk at the respondent’s petrol station by a member of staff. A manager had tried to dissuade the assailant, and the claim for damages against the supermarket had failed at first . .
Cited – Lister and Others v Hesley Hall Ltd HL 3-May-2001
A school board employed staff to manage a residential school for vulnerable children. The staff committed sexual abuse of the children. The school denied vicarious liability for the acts of the teachers.
Held: ‘Vicarious liability is legal . .
Cited – Graham v Commercial Bodyworks Ltd CA 5-Feb-2015
The claimant had been very badly burned. He was covered in flammable liquid when a co-worker lit a cigarette.
Held: The claimant’s appeal failed. ‘although the defendant employers did create a risk by requiring their employees to work with . .
Cited – Cockbill v Riley QBD 22-Mar-2013
The claimant sufferd catastrophic injury diving into a paddling pool at a party held by the defendant for his daughter to celebrate completing her GCSEs.
Held: The claim failed. ‘It was reasonably foreseeable that someone would lose his . .
Cited – Dubai Aluminium Company Limited v Salaam and Others HL 5-Dec-2002
Partners Liable for Dishonest Act of Solicitor
A solicitor had been alleged to have acted dishonestly, having assisted in a fraudulent breach of trust by drafting certain documents. Contributions to the damages were sought from his partners.
Held: The acts complained of were so close to . .
Appeal from – Chell v Tarmac Cement and Lime Ltd QBD 5-Oct-2020
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Vicarious Liability

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.671052

Newton v Cammell Laird and Co (Shipbuilders and Engineers) Ltd: CA 1969

The court considered when the limitation period in a personal injury claim would start to run, where the plaintiff might be unaware of the damage: ‘You have to ask yourself: At what date was it reasonable for him – for the sick man himself – to have taken advice and found out that his illness was due to his employer’s negligence or breach of duty. You do not ask: At what date would a reasonable person have taken advice. You ask: At what date was it reasonable for this man to take it? In other words, at what date ought he to have taken advice and found out that he had a worthwhile action?’ Widgery LJ: ‘When one has to consider constructive notice under section 7(5)(c) it is necessary to look at all the circumstances of the particular individual concerned to see whether, when all those circumstances are looked at in the round, it can be said that his failure to take advice was reasonable.’

Judges:

Lord Denning MR, Widgery LJ

Citations:

[1969] 1 WLR 415

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1963 7(5)(c)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Marks and Spencer Group Plc and Another v Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer CA 3-Jun-2004
The defendant firm of solicitors sought leave to appeal against an injunction requiring them not to act for a client in making a bid to take over the business of the claimant, a former client of the firm.
Held: Leave was refused. The appeal . .
Applied – 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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.200431

Re Workvale Ltd (In Liquidation): CA 8 Apr 1992

A limited company was correctly restored to the register from dissolution so that its insurers could face an arguable claim. Where a first writ issued within the primary limitation period was ineffective (although not a nullity) through having been issued against a company which had been struck off the register, the Walkley principle does not defeat a second action in limine, despite the defect being curable, by having the company restored to the register.

Citations:

Gazette 08-Apr-1992, [1992] 1 WLR 416

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Distinguished – Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd HL 1979
The plaintiff tried to bring a second action in respect of an industrial injury claim outside the limitation period so as to overcome the likelihood that his first action, although timeous, would be dismissed for want of prosecution.
Held: He . .
Applied – White v Glass CA 17-Feb-1989
The plaintiff had sued his club under its name, but it was an unincorporated association, and the action was stricken out as improperly constituted. The first writ issued within the primary limitation period but was ineffective. The defendant . .

Cited by:

Cited – Barry Young (Deceased) v Western Power Distribution (South West) Plc CA 18-Jul-2003
The deceased had begun an action on becoming ill after exposure to asbestos by the defendant. He withdrew his action after receiving expert evidence that his illness was unrelated. A post-mortem examination showed this evidence to be mistaken. His . .
Cited – Jacqueline Adam v Rasal Ali CA 21-Feb-2006
The defendant sought damages against the defendant for personal injury from his alleged negligence. Her action was struck out and she recommenced the action. The defendant pleaded that she was out of time. The claimant said that the first action . .
Cited – Horton v Sadler and Another HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimant had been injured in a road traffic accident for which the defendant was responsible in negligence. The defendant was not insured, and so a claim was to be made against the MIB. The plaintiff issued proceedings just before the expiry of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insolvency, Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.85903

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 aircraft.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. There was nothing in the convention to indicate that the purpose of the flight, and ‘the natural and ordinary meaning of the word ‘aircraft’ is wide enough to include a passenger carrying hot air balloon. ‘ This balloon was designed for the carriage of passengers. The claimant was undoubtedly being carried in the balloon at the material time and was not himself making any contribution to the process of flying. The fact that the claimant just went for the ride and the destination was to a large extent unpredictable was immaterial to whether he was carried as a passenger. The predominant purpose of the journey was to be carried by air from the starting point to the destination point, wherever that turned out to be. The claimant did not know precisely where the destination point would be, but that did not prevent him from being carried as a passenger.
Article 29(2) does not permit the 2 year period to be suspended, interrupted or extended by reference to domestic law.

Judges:

Mummery LJ, Dyson LJ, Jacob LJ

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 12, Times 24-Mar-2009, [2009] WLR (D) 18, [2009] 3 WLR 351, [2009] 2 All ER 175, [2009] QB 778, [2009] 1 CLC 1, [2009] 1 QB 778, [2009] Bus LR 954, [2009] PIQR P12, [2009] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 316

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Carriage by Air Acts (Application of Provisions) Order 1967 (SI 1967/480), Carriage by Air Act 1961

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Fellowes or Herd v Clyde Helicopters Ltd HL 27-Feb-1997
A Police officer being carried in a force helicopter, and operating within his own force’s area was not on a matter of international carriage, and was not subject to the restrictions on recovery of damages. The helicopter had crashed into a building . .
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 – Financial Services Compensation Scheme Ltd v Larnell (Insurances) Ltd CA 29-Nov-2005
The claimant investors said that their financial adviser, the defendant insolvent company, had given them negligent advice. The action was brought as a preliminary to claiming against the defendant’s insurers under the 1930 Act, in the way made . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – In re General Rolling Stock Co; Joint Stock Discount Company’s Claim CA 21-Jun-1872
Upon a winding up: ‘A duty and a trust are thus imposed upon the Court, to take care that the assets of the company shall be applied in discharge of its liabilities. What liabilities? All the liabilities of the company existing at the time when the . .
Cited – Aries Tanker Corp v Total Transport Ltd; The Aries HL 1977
Claims for freight charges are an exception to the general rule that all claims between parties must be resolved in one action. A claim for freight cannot be a claim ‘on the same grounds’ as a counter-claim for loss or damage arising out of the . .
Cited – Sidhu and Others v British Airways Plc; Abnett (Known as Sykes) v Same HL 13-Dec-1996
The claimants had been air passengers who were unlawfully detained in Kuwait, when their plane was captured whilst on the ground on the invasion of Kuwait. They sought damages for that detention.
Held: There are no exceptions to the Warsaw . .
Cited – Milor SRL and Others v British Airways Plc CA 15-Feb-1996
The Warsaw Convention allows ‘forum shopping’, and the doctrine of forum non conveniens applies. Article 28(1) specifies the jurisdictions in which claims under the Convention may be brought. If the English Court is one of those jurisdictions, then . .
Appeal from – Laroche v Spirit of Adventure (UK) Ltd QBD 17-Apr-2008
The claimant was injured in a hot air balloon. The defendant relied on the Rules in the Act to limit his liability to two years after the event.
Held: An internal flight in a hot air balloon was to be characterised as a journey by aircraft. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Transport, Damages

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.280068

Brown and Others v South West Lakes Trust and Others: CA 17 Jan 2022

This appeal raises issues about whether claims: (1) under the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984 (‘the 1984 Act’) against occupiers of land adjoining a highway; and (2) against the relevant highway authority; arising from a tragic road traffic accident were reasonable causes of action or had a real prospect of success.

Judges:

Lord Justice Lewison
Lord Justice Dingemans
And
Lord Justice William Davis

Citations:

[2022] EWCA Civ 18

Links:

Bailii, Judiciary

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1984

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence, Land

Updated: 23 March 2022; Ref: scu.671302

Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police: SC 8 Feb 2018

Limits to Police Exemption from Liability

The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence.
Held: Her appeal succeeded.
It is normally only in a novel type of case, where established principles do not provide an answer, that the courts need to go beyond those principles in order to decide whether a duty of care should be recognised. Since the police generally owe a duty of care not to inflict physical injury by their actions when such a duty arises under the ordinary principles of the law of negligence, unless statute or other common law principle provides otherwise, there was no requirement here to examine whether the recognition of the claimed duty would be fair, just and reasonable.
‘Properly understood, Caparo thus achieves a balance between legal certainty and justice. In the ordinary run of cases, courts consider what has been decided previously and follow the precedents (unless it is necessary to consider whether the precedents should be departed from). In cases where the question whether a duty of care arises has not previously been decided, the courts will consider the closest analogies in the existing law, with a view to maintaining the coherence of the law and the avoidance of inappropriate distinctions. They will also weigh up the reasons for and against imposing liability, in order to decide whether the existence of a duty of care would be just and reasonable.’
and: ‘On examination . . there is nothing in the ratio of any of the authorities relied on by the respondent which is inconsistent with the police being under a liability for negligence resulting in personal injuries where such liability would arise under ordinary principles of the law of tort. That is so notwithstanding the existence of some dicta which might be read as suggesting the contrary.’
[2018] WLR(D) 83

Judges:

Lady Hale, Lord Mance, Lord Reed, Lord Hughes, Lord Hodge

Citations:

[2018] UKSC 4, [2018] 2 WLR 595, [2018] AC 736, [2018] PIQR P9, [2018] 2 All ER 1041, [2018] WLR(D) 83, UKSC 2016/0082

Links:

Bailii, Bailii Summary, WLRD, SC, SC Summary, SC Video Summary, SC 12 Jul 2017 am Video, SC 2017 Jul 12 pm Video

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire HL 28-Apr-1987
No General ty of Care Owed by Police
The mother of a victim of the Yorkshire Ripper claimed in negligence against the police alleging that they had failed to satisfy their duty to exercise all reasonable care and skill to apprehend the perpetrator of the murders and to protect members . .
Appeal from – Robinson v West Yorkshire Police CA 5-Feb-2014
The claimant was a bystander, injured during an arrest on the street by officers employed by the respondent. She now appealed against rejection of her claim in negligence. Held; No duty of care was owed, and that, even if the officers had owed Mrs . .
Cited – Desmond v The Chief Constable of Nottinghamshire Police CA 12-Jan-2011
The claimant appealed from the rejection of his claim in negligence against the police. He had been arrested on suspicion of a sexual assault, but the investigating officer concluded that he was not responsible for the crime. Despite this, several . .
Cited – Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council HL 12-May-1977
The plaintiff bought her apartment, but discovered later that the foundations were defective. The local authority had supervised the compliance with Building Regulations whilst it was being built, but had failed to spot the fault. The authority . .
Cited – Marc Rich and Co Ag and Others v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd and Others HL 6-Jul-1995
A surveyor acting on behalf of the classification society had recommended that after repairs specified by him had been carried out a vessel, the Nicholas H, should be allowed to proceed. It was lost at sea.
Held: The marine classification . .
Cited – MacFarlane and Another v Tayside Health Board HL 21-Oct-1999
Child born after vasectomy – Damages Limited
Despite a vasectomy, Mr MacFarlane fathered a child, and he and his wife sought damages for the cost of care and otherwise of the child. He appealed a rejection of his claim.
Held: The doctor undertakes a duty of care in regard to the . .
Cited – Smith and Others v The Ministry of Defence SC 19-Jun-2013
The claimants were PRs of men who had died or were severely injured on active duty in Iraq being variously fired at by mistake by other coalition forces, or dying in vehicles attacked by roadside bombs. Appeals were heard against a finding that the . .
Cited – Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
Cited – Barrett v London Borough of Enfield HL 17-Jun-1999
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Cited – Perrett v Collins, Underwood PFA (Ulair) Limited (T/a Popular Flying Association) CA 22-May-1998
The plaintiff was a passenger in an aircraft which crashed, and there was a preliminary issue as to the liability to him of those who certified that the aircraft was fit to fly. The propeller was mismatched to the gearbox.
Held: A certifying . .
Cited – Entick v Carrington KBD 1765
The Property of Every Man is Sacred
The King’s Messengers entered the plaintiff’s house and seized his papers under a warrant issued by the Secretary of State, a government minister.
Held: The common law does not recognise interests of state as a justification for allowing what . .
Cited – Mitchell and Another (Aps) v Glasgow City Council SCS 29-Feb-2008
(Extra Division, Inner House) The pursuers sought to hold the Council responsible in negligence after a neighbour (D) killed the husband and father. The defenders had been aware of D’s threatening and aggressive behaviour towards the deceased, . .
Cited – The Mersey Docks And Harbour Board Trustees v Gibbs And Others; The Mersey Docks And Harbour Board’ Trustees v Pierce, W Penhallow, And Others HL 30-Jun-1866
Persons who have a duty to perform, and who may be made responsible for injuries if they know of causes of mystery which in the discharge of that Duty they ought to remedy, are equally responsible if they negligence they remain ignorant of those . .
Cited – Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council HL 1-Apr-2004
Statutory Duty Not Extended by Common Law
The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down.
Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include . .
Cited – Geddis v Proprietors of Bann Reservoir HL 18-Feb-1878
The owner of land injured by operations authorised by statute ‘suffers a private loss for the public benefit’, and in the absence of clear statutory authority is unable to claim: ‘It is now thoroughly well established that no action will lie for . .
Cited – East Suffolk Rivers Catchment Board v Kent HL 1941
An exceptionally high spring tide caused many breaches of the banks of the River Deben, and extensive flooding, including the respondent’s farm. By section 6 of the 1930 Act, the appellants had a statutory power to maintain the flood defences, but . .
Cited – Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office HL 6-May-1970
A yacht was damaged by boys who had escaped from the supervision of prison officers in a nearby Borstal institution. The boat owners sued the Home Office alleging negligence by the prison officers.
Held: Any duty of a borstal officer to use . .
Cited – Smith v Littlewoods Organisation Limited (Chief Constable, Fife Constabulary, third party); Maloco v Littlewoods Organisation Ltd HL 1987
The defendant acquired a semi derelict cinema with a view to later development of the site. A fire started by others spread to the pursuer’s adjoining property.
Held: The defendants were not liable in negligence. The intervention of a third . .
Cited – Stovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party) HL 24-Jul-1996
Statutory Duty Does Not Create Common Law Duty
The mere existence of statutory power to remedy a defect cannot of itself create a duty of care to do so. A highway authority need not have a duty of care to highway users because of its duty to maintain the highway. The two stage test ‘involves . .
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 – Murphy v Brentwood District Council HL 26-Jul-1990
Anns v Merton Overruled
The claimant appellant was a house owner. He had bought the house from its builders. Those builders had employed civil engineers to design the foundations. That design was negligent. They had submitted the plans to the defendant Council for approval . .
Cited – Phelps v Hillingdon London Borough Council; Anderton v Clwyd County Council; Gower v Bromley London Borough Council; Jarvis v Hampshire County Council HL 28-Jul-2000
The plaintiffs each complained of negligent decisions in his or her education made by the defendant local authorities. In three of them the Court of Appeal had struck out the plaintiff’s claim and in only one had it been allowed to proceed.
Cited – Glasbrook Brothers Limited v Glamorgan County Council HL 1925
A colliery manager asked for police protection for his colliery during a strike. He wanted police officers to be billeted on the premises. The senior police officer for the area was willing to provide protection by a mobile force, but he refused to . .
Cited – The Attorney General v Hartwell PC 23-Feb-2004
PC (The British Virgin Islands) A police officer had taken the police revolver, and used it to shoot the claimant. It was alleged that the respondent police force were vicariously liable for his acts and also . .
Cited – Blackburn v Commissioner of the Police for the Metropolis CA 1968
By common law police officers owe to the general public a duty to enforce the criminal law. However, police are servants of no one but the law itself, and a chief officer of police has a wide discretion as to the manner in which the duty is . .
Cited – Regina v Dytham CACD 1979
A constable was 30 yards away from the entrance to a club, from which he saw a man ejected. There was a fight involving cries and screams and the man was beaten and kicked to death in the gutter outside the club. The constable made no move to . .
Cited – Knightley v Johns and others CA 27-Mar-1981
There had been an accident in a tunnel, blocking it. The defendant inspector ordered a traffic constable to ride into the tunnel on his motorcycle against the flow of traffic. The constable crashed and sought damages for negligence against the . .
Cited – Rigby and another v Chief Constable of Northamptonshire 1985
The police were found liable to pay damages for negligence having fired a gas canister into the plaintiffs’ gunsmith’s hop premises in order to flush out a dangerous psychopath. There had been a real and substantial fire risk in firing the canister . .
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 . .
Cited – Calveley v Chief Constable of the Merseyside Police HL 1989
Police officers brought an action in negligence against a Chief Constable on the ground that disciplinary proceedings against them had been negligently conducted. They claimed that the investigating officers had negligently failed to conduct the . .
Cited – Elguzouli-Daf v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis and Another CA 16-Nov-1994
The Court upheld decisions striking out actions for negligence brought by claimants who had been arrested and held in custody during criminal investigations which were later discontinued. The Crown Prosecution Service owes no general duty of care to . .
Cited – Ashley and Another v Chief Constable of Sussex Police HL 23-Apr-2008
The claimants sought to bring an action for damages after a family member suspected of dealing drugs, was shot by the police. At the time he was naked. The police officer had been acquitted by a criminal court of murder. The chief constable now . .
Cited – SXH v The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) SC 11-Apr-2017
The Court was asked: ‘Does a decision by a public prosecutor to bring criminal proceedings against a person fall potentially within the scope of article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in circumstances where a) the prosecutor has . .
Cited – Minio-Paluello v The Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 16-Dec-2011
The Claimant sought damages for assault (or battery) and/or in negligence arising out of serious injuries which she suffered in the course of a pro-Palestinian demonstration. She was pulled up from the ground by a police officer with excessive . .
Cited – McDonnell v The Commissioner of Police for The Metropolis and Another CA 14-May-2015
The claim for damages by a suspected drug dealer for assault arising from the use of excessive force during his arrest failed only on its facts. . .
Cited – Brooks v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis and others HL 21-Apr-2005
The claimant was with Stephen Lawrence when they were both attacked and Mr Lawrence killed. He claimed damages for the negligent way the police had dealt with his case, and particularly said that they had failed to assess him as a victim of crime, . .

Cited by:

Cited – Steel and Another v NRAM Ltd (Formerly NRAM Plc) SC 28-Feb-2018
The appellant solicitor acted in a land transaction. The land was mortgaged to the respondent bank. She wrote to the bank stating her client’s intention to repay the whole loan. The letter was negligently mistaken and the bankers allowed the . .
Cited – James-Bowen and Others v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis SC 25-Jul-2018
The Court was asked whether the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis (‘the Commissioner’) owes a duty to her officers, in the conduct of proceedings against her based on their alleged misconduct, to take reasonable care to protect them from . .
Cited – Darnley v Croydon Health Services NHS Trust SC 10-Oct-2018
The claimant had been assaulted. He presented at the defendant hospital with head injuries. Despite his complaints he said he was not treated properly, being told to wait five hours at reception, and went home. Later an ambulance was delayed and he . .
Cited – Poole Borough Council v GN and Another SC 6-Jun-2019
This appeal is concerned with the liability of a local authority for what is alleged to have been a negligent failure to exercise its social services functions so as to protect children from harm caused by third parties. The principal question of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence, Police

Leading Case

Updated: 11 February 2022; Ref: scu.604215

Stovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party): HL 24 Jul 1996

Statutory Duty Does Not Create Common Law Duty

The mere existence of statutory power to remedy a defect cannot of itself create a duty of care to do so. A highway authority need not have a duty of care to highway users because of its duty to maintain the highway. The two stage test ‘involves starting with a prima facie assumption that a duty of care exists if it is reasonably foreseeable that carelessness may cause damage and then asking whether there are any considerations which ought to ‘negative, or to reduce or limit the scope of the duty or the class of person to whom it is owed or the damages to which a breach of it may arise’. Subsequent decisions in this House and the Privy Council have preferred to approach the question the other way round, starting with situations in which a duty has been held to exist and then asking whether there are considerations of analogy, policy, fairness and justice for extending it to cover a new situation: see for example Lord Bridge in Caparo (supra) . . It can be said that, provided that the considerations of policy etc. are properly analysed, it should not matter whether one starts from one end or the other. On the other hand the assumption from which one starts makes a great deal of difference if the analysis is wrong. The trend of authorities has been to discourage the assumption that anyone who suffers loss is prima facie entitled to compensation from the person (preferably insured or a public authority) whose act or omission can be said to have caused it. The default position is that he is not.’ ‘A common law duty must not be inconsistent with the performance by the authority of its statutory duties and powers in the manner intended by Parliament, or contrary in any other way to the presumed intention of Parliament.’ and ‘the minimum preconditions for basing a duty of care upon the existence of a statutory power, if it can be done at all, are, first, that it would in the circumstances have been irrational not to have exercised the power, so that there was in effect a public law duty to act, and secondly, that there are exceptional grounds for holding that the policy of the statute requires compensation to be paid to persons who suffer loss because the power was not exercised.’
Lord Hoffmann said: ‘In my view the creation of a duty of care upon a highway authority, even on grounds of irrationality in failing to exercise a power, would inevitably expose the authority’s budgetary decisions to judicial inquiry. This would distort the priorities of local authorities, which would be bound to try to play safe by increasing their spending on road improvements rather than risk enormous liabilities for personal injury accidents. They will spend less on education or social services. I think that it is important, before extending the duty of care owed by public authorities, to consider the cost to the community of the defensive measures which they are likely to take in order to avoid liability. . .’ Statutory bodies do not occupy a special position so far as liability for nuisance is concerned unless statute puts them in that special position: ‘Since Mersey Docks and Harbour Board Trustees v Gibbs (1866) L.R. 1 H.L. 93 it has been clear law that in the absence of express statutory authority, a public body is in principle liable for torts in the same way as a private person. But its statutory powers or duties may restrict its liability. For example, it may be authorised to do something which necessarily involves committing what would otherwise be a tort. In such a case it will not be liable: Allen v Gulf Oil Refining Ltd [1981] AC 1001. Or it may have discretionary powers which enable it to do things to achieve a statutory purpose notwithstanding that they involve a foreseeable risk of damage to others. In such a case, a bona fide exercise of the discretion will not attract liability: . . . .’.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead

Citations:

Gazette 25-Sep-1996, Times 26-Jul-1996, [1996] AC 923, [1996] UKHL 15, [1996] 3 All ER 801, [1996] 3 WLR 389

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 41(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Stovin v Wise (Norfolk City Council, 3rd party) CA 16-Feb-1994
A road user was injured on a corner which was known to the highway authority to be dangerous. The authority had sought to make arrangements with the owner of land adjoining the highway to remove a bank which obstructed the view.
Held: The . .
Cited – Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson HL 26-May-1932
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability
The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a . .
Cited – Regina v Deputy Governor of Parkhurst Prison, Ex parte Hague, Weldon v Home Office HL 24-Jul-1991
The prisoner challenged the decision to place him in segregation under Prison Rule 43. Under rule 43(1) the initial power to segregate was given to ‘the governor’. The case arose from the fact that the governor of one prison had purported to . .
Approved – Sutherland Shire Council v Heyman 4-Jul-1985
(High Court of Australia) The court considered a possible extension of the law of negligence.
Brennan J said: ‘the law should develop novel categories of negligence incrementally and by analogy with established categories. ‘
Dean J said: . .

Cited by:

Cited – K v the Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 31-May-2002
The applicant sought damages from the defendant who had released from custody pending deportation a man convicted of violent sexual crimes and who had then raped her. She appealed against a strike out of her claim. She had been refused information . .
Cited – Bellefield Computer Services Limited, Unigate Properties Limited; Unigate Dairies Limited; Unigate (Uk) Limited; Unigate Dairies (Western) Limited v E Turner and Sons Limited Admn 28-Jan-2000
The Defendant builders constructed a steel building to be used as, inter alia. a dairy. The original owners sold it to the appellants. A fire spread from the storage area to the rest of the dairy and caused much damage. The Builders, had they . .
Cited – JD, MAK and RK, RK and Another v East Berkshire Community Health, Dewsbury Health Care NHS Trust and Kirklees Metropolitan Council, Oldham NHS Trust and Dr Blumenthal CA 31-Jul-2003
Damages were sought by parents for psychological harm against health authorities for the wrongful diagnosis of differing forms of child abuse. They appealed dismissal of their awards on the grounds that it was not ‘fair just and reasonable’ to . .
Cited – Chagos Islanders v The Attorney General, Her Majesty’s British Indian Ocean Territory Commissioner QBD 9-Oct-2003
The Chagos Islands had been a British dependent territory since 1814. The British government repatriated the islanders in the 1960s, and the Ilois now sought damages for their wrongful displacement, misfeasance, deceit, negligence and to establish a . .
Cited – A and Another v Essex County Council CA 17-Dec-2003
The claimant sought damages. The respondent had acted as an adoption agency but had failed to disclose all relevant information about the child.
Held: Any such duty extended only during the period where the child was with the prospective . .
Cited – Binod Sutradhar v Natural Environment Research Council CA 20-Feb-2004
The defendant council had carried out research into a water supply in India in the 1980s. The claimant drank the water, and claimed damages for having consumed arsenic in it.
Held: There is a close link between the tests in law for proximity . .
Cited – Gorringe v Calderdale Metropolitan Borough Council HL 1-Apr-2004
Statutory Duty Not Extended by Common Law
The claimant sought damages after a road accident. The driver came over the crest of a hill and hit a bus. The road was not marked with any warning as to the need to slow down.
Held: The claim failed. The duty could not be extended to include . .
Cited – Larner v Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council CA 20-Dec-2000
The duty on a local authority to promote road safety did not remove from them the discretion as to how that duty was to be implemented. A claim that the authority had failed to place certain signage, and that an accident had occurred which might not . .
Applied – Capital and Counties Plc and Another v Hampshire County Council; Etc CA 20-Mar-1997
Three cases were brought against fire services after what were said to be negligent responses to call outs. On one, the fire brigade was called to a fire at office premises in Hampshire. The fire triggered the operation of a heat-activated sprinkler . .
Cited – Sandhar, Murray v Department of Transport, Environment and the Regions QBD 19-Jan-2004
The claimant asserted a common law duty on the respondent to maintain a roadway free of frost.
Held: No such common law duty existed. Where parliament has conferred a discretionary power, ‘ . . the minimum preconditions for basing a duty of . .
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 – OLL Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport QBD 22-Jul-1997
Coastguard Not liable in Negligence
Eight children with a teacher and two instructors set off on a canoeing trip but did not return. They got into difficulties at sea. Two became separated from the rest. The canoes capsized and sank. Some tried to swim ashore. Two more members became . .
Cited – Bybrook Barn Garden Centre Ltd and Others v Kent County Council CA 8-Jan-2001
A culvert had been constructed taking a stream underneath the road. At the time when it came into the ownership of the local authority, it was adequate for this purpose. Later developments increased the flow, and the culvert came to become an . .
Cited – Thoburn v Northumberland County Council CA 19-Jan-1999
The claimant alleged that the defendant by allowing a flood across a road not to be cleared was in breach of their statutory duty under the 1980 Act.
Held: Though the blockage was not entirely on the Highway, the nature and extent of it was . .
Cited – Barrett v London Borough of Enfield HL 17-Jun-1999
The claimant had spent his childhood in foster care, and now claimed damages against a local authority for decisions made and not made during that period. The judge’s decision to strike out the claim had been upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Cited – Carty v London Borough of Croydon CA 27-Jan-2005
The claimant sought damages in negligence from education officers employed by the respondent. He appealed refusal of his claim. A statement of special education needs had been made which he said did not address his learning difficulties. The . .
Cited – Regina v Lam and Others (T/a ‘Namesakes of Torbay’) and Borough of Torbay CA 30-Jul-1997
The claimant sought damages after the planning authority allowed the first defendant to conduct a manufacturing business in the course of which spraying activities took place which caused them personal injuries and loss of business.
Held: The . .
Cited – HM Customs and Excise v Barclays Bank Plc HL 21-Jun-2006
The claimant had served an asset freezing order on the bank in respect of one of its customers. The bank paid out on a cheque inadvertently as to the order. The Commissioners claimed against the bank in negligence. The bank denied any duty of care. . .
Cited – Neil Martin Ltd v Revenue and Customs Commissioners 28-Sep-2006
The claimant sought damages from the revenue for their failure properly to process his claim for a sub-contractor’s certificate which had led to losses.
Held: The revenue owed no common law duty of care to the claimant and nor were damages . .
Cited – Vellino v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 31-Jul-2001
The police were not under any duty to protect someone who had been arrested from injuring himself in an attempt to escape. The claimant had a history of seeking to avoid capture by jumping from his flat window. On this occasion he injured himself in . .
Cited – Somerville v Scottish Ministers HL 24-Oct-2007
The claimants complained of their segregation while in prison. Several preliminary questions were to be decided: whether damages might be payable for breach of a Convention Right; wheher the act of a prison governor was the act of the executive; . .
Cited – K v Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust and Another QBD 30-May-2008
The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim in negligence. He had leaped from a window in a suicide attempt. The accommodation was provided by the defendant whilst caring for him under the 1983 Act.
Held: The case should be . .
Cited – Connor v Surrey County Council CA 18-Mar-2010
The claimant teacher said that she suffered personal injury from stress after the board of governors improperly failed to protect her from from false complaints. The Council now appealed against an award of substantial damages.
Held: The . .
Cited – Home Office v Mohammed and Others CA 29-Mar-2011
The claimants sought damages saying that after a decision had been made that they should receive indefinite leave to remain in 2001 (latest), the leave was not issued until 2007 (earliest) thus causing them severe losses. The defendant now appealed . .
Cited – Michael and Others v The Chief Constable of South Wales Police and Another SC 28-Jan-2015
The claimants asserted negligence in the defendant in failing to provide an adequate response to an emergency call, leading, they said to the death of their daughter at the hands of her violent partner. They claimed also under the 1998 Act. The . .
Cited – Hurst and Another v Hampshire County Council CA 19-Jun-1997
A Local Authority is liable for any damage to adjacent property caused by the roots of a tree growing on the verge of a public highway.
Held: Pre-adoption trees vest in the highway authority for all purposes. . .
Cited – Dodson v Environment Agency QBD 28-Feb-2013
The claimant asserted that the steps taken by the defendant to encourage wildlife in the estuary had led to otters predating his fish farm stocks, and that the claimant had not been informed of this, in particular as to the construction of otter . .
Cited – Robinson v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police SC 8-Feb-2018
Limits to Police Exemption from Liability
The claimant, an elderly lady was bowled over and injured when police were chasing a suspect through the streets. As they arrested him they fell over on top of her. She appealed against refusal of her claim in negligence.
Held: Her appeal . .
Cited – Poole Borough Council v GN and Another SC 6-Jun-2019
This appeal is concerned with the liability of a local authority for what is alleged to have been a negligent failure to exercise its social services functions so as to protect children from harm caused by third parties. The principal question of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Administrative, Personal Injury, Local Government

Leading Case

Updated: 11 February 2022; Ref: scu.89580

X and Another v London Borough of Hounslow: CA 2 Apr 2009

The authority appealed against an order finding it responsible for failing to prevent a serious assault on the claimants by local youths. Both claimants were known to the appellants to have had very low IQs.
Held: a local authority’s social services and housing departments had not assumed a responsibility to protect vulnerable council tenants and their children from harm inflicted by third parties. The case was not one of assumption of responsibility unless the assumption of responsibility could properly be held to be voluntary. That was because ‘a public authority will not be held to have assumed a common law duty merely by doing what the statute requires or what it has power to do under a statute, at any rate unless the duty arises out of the relationship created as a result, such as in Lord Hoffmann’s example [in Gorringe . .] of the doctor patient relationship.’ Since the claimants’ case amounted to no more than that the council had failed to move them into temporary accommodation in breach of its statutory duty or in the exercise of its statutory powers, it failed because none of the statutory provisions relied on gave rise to a private law cause of action.

Judges:

Sir Anthony Clarke Mr
Lord Justice Tuckey
And
Lord Justice Goldring

Citations:

[2009] EWCA Civ 286, [2009] Fam Law 487, [2009] NPC 63, [2010] HLR 4, [2009] 2 FLR 262, [2009] PTSR 1158, [2009] 3 FCR 266, (2009) 12 CCL Rep 254

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Poole Borough Council v GN and Another SC 6-Jun-2019
This appeal is concerned with the liability of a local authority for what is alleged to have been a negligent failure to exercise its social services functions so as to protect children from harm caused by third parties. The principal question of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Local Government, Personal Injury

Updated: 11 February 2022; Ref: scu.329549

AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others: SC 12 Oct 2011

Standing to Claim under A1P1 ECHR

The appellants had written employers’ liability insurance policies. They appealed against rejection of their challenge to the 2009 Act which provided that asymptomatic pleural plaques, pleural thickening and asbestosis should constitute actionable harm for the purposes of an action of damages for personal injury.
Held: The insurers’ appeals failed. The Court upheld the power of the Scottish Parliament to reverse the decision in Rothwell.
Legislation has to be construed bearing in mind the societal values which Parliament can be taken to have intended it to embody.
To establish a standing to claim under Article 1 of the Convention, the claimant had first to show that it was within the Convention, a victim. This was to be ascertained by three questions: (1) whether the insurer claimants were ‘victims’ under Article 34, (2) if so, was the interference with their ‘possessions’ in pursuit of a legitimate aim and (3) if again so, whether the means were reasonably proportionate to the aim sought to be realised. The insurers were indeed victims, and the sums for which they would be liable were indeed possessions. The Act was in pursuit of a legitimate aim, and the real issue was as to proportionality. Given the margin of appreciation afforded it could not be said to be unreasonable.
While the Scottish Parliament was subject to the jurisdiction of the Courts, the common law grounds of review did not apply, but the Scottish Parliament powers of legislation were subject to the statutory limits in section 29(2)(d) of the 1998 Act, which required Scottish legislation to be compatible with Convention rights.
Lord Hope said: ‘The dominant characteristic of the Scottish Parliament is its firm rooting in the traditions of a universal democracy. It draws its strength from the electorate. While the judges, who are not elected, are best placed to protect the rights of the individual, including those who are ignored or despised by the majority, the elected members of a legislature of this kind are best placed to judge what is in the country’s best interests as a whole. A sovereign Parliament is, according to the traditional view, immune from judicial scrutiny because it is protected by the principle of sovereignty. But it shares with the devolved legislatures, which are not sovereign, the advantages that flow from the depth and width of the experience of its elected members and the mandate that has been given to them by the electorate. This suggests that the judges should intervene, if at all, only in the most exceptional circumstances.’
and ‘The Scottish Parliament takes its place under our constitutional arrangements as a self-standing democratically elected legislature. Its democratic mandate to make laws for the people of Scotland is beyond question. Acts that the Scottish Parliament enacts which are within its legislative competence enjoy, in that respect, the highest legal authority. The United Kingdom Parliament has vested in the Scottish Parliament the authority to make laws that are within its devolved competence.’
Lord Reed said: ‘the Scottish Parliament is not a sovereign parliament in the sense that Westminster can be described as sovereign: its powers were conferred by an Act of Parliament, and those powers, being defined, are limited. It is the function of the courts to interpret and apply those limits, and the Scottish Parliament is therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the courts.’ and
‘Judicial review under the common law is based upon an understanding of the respective constitutional responsibilities of public authorities and the courts. The constitutional function of the courts in the field of public law is to ensure, so far as they can, that public authorities respect the rule of law. The courts therefore have the responsibility of ensuring that the public authority in question does not misuse its powers or exceed their limits. The extent of the courts’ responsibility in relation to a particular exercise of power by a public authority necessarily depends upon the particular circumstances, including the nature of the public authority in question, the type of power being exercised, the process by which it is exercised, and the extent to which the powers of the authority have limits or purposes which the courts can identify and adjudicate upon.’

Judges:

Lord Hope, Deputy President, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr, Lord Clarke, Lord Dyson, Lord Reed

Citations:

UKSC 2011/0108, [2011] UKSC 46, 2011 SLT 1061, [2012] 1 AC 868, (2011) 122 BMLR 149, [2011] 3 WLR 871, [2012] HRLR 3, [2011] UKHRR 1221

Links:

SC, SC Summary, Bailii, Bailii Summary

Statutes:

Damages (Asbestos-related Conditions) (Scotland) Act 2009, European Convention on Human Rights 1, Scotland Act 1998 29(2)(d), Employers’ Liability (Compulsory Insurance) Act 1969, Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 1930, Third Parties (Rights against Insurers) Act 2010

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

At Outer House – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v Lord Advocate and Others SCS 8-Jan-2010
The claimant sought to challenge the validity of the 2009 Act by judicial review. The Act would make their insured and themselves liable to very substantial unanticipated claims for damages for pleural plaques which would not previousl or otherwise . .
At Inner House – AXA General Insurance Ltd and Others v The Scottish Ministers and Others SCS 12-Apr-2011
(First Division) The insurance companies sought judicial review of the 2009 Act which lay them open, as employers liability insurers, to substantial historic claims for asymptotic neural plaque injuries.
Held: The companies’ appeal failed. The . .
Cited – Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar HL 17-Oct-2007
The claimant sought damages for the development of neural plaques, having been exposed to asbestos while working for the defendant. The presence of such plaques were symptomless, and would not themselves cause other asbestos related disease, but . .
Cited – Wright v Stoddard International Plc and Another (No 2) SCS 23-Oct-2007
(Supplementary Opinion) Lord Uist applied the decision in Rothwell, although on the facts he would not have awarded damages anyway. . .
Cited – Church v Ministry of Defence QBD 23-Feb-1984
The 62 year old claimant sought damages after working in in the defendant’s dockyard and being exposed to asbestos. Pleural plaques were apparent on X-ray and the pleura would constrict the lung and induce breathlessness; and the asbestos must have . .
Cited – Patterson v Ministry of Defence QBD 29-Jul-1986
The plaintiff had been exposed to asbestos when working for the defendant. X-rays revealed development of pleural plaques, but these would remain asymptomatic.
Held: Material damage sufficient to set time running was the same as damage . .
Cited – Nicol v Scottish Power plc 1998
. .
Cited – Gibson v McAndrew Wormald and Co Ltd 1998
Pleural plaques constituted an identifiable injury for which damages were recoverable. . .
Cited – Sporrong and Lonnroth v Sweden ECHR 23-Sep-1982
Balance of Interests in peaceful enjoyment claim
(Plenary Court) The claimants challenged orders expropriating their properties for redevelopment, and the banning of construction pending redevelopment. The orders remained in place for many years.
Held: Article 1 comprises three distinct . .
Cited – The National and Provincial Building Society, The Leeds Permanent Building Society And The Yorkshire Building Society v The United Kingdom ECHR 23-Oct-1997
There was no breach of human rights by the retrospective removal of a right to reclaim overpaid tax. Such a decision was within the general power of a government to impose and collect tax. Not every difference in treatment will amount to a violation . .
Cited – Draon v France ECHR 6-Oct-2005
ECHR Judgment (Merits and Just Satisfaction) – Violation of P1-1; No separate issue under Art.14 in conjunction with P1-1; No separate issue under Art. 6-1; No violation of Art. 13; No violation of Art. 8; Costs . .
Cited – Back v Finland ECHR 20-Jul-2004
The claimant was the owner of a substantial debt owed by another individual. However the value of his debt was reduced to a very small level when the debtor entered a statutory scheme for compromise of debts.
Held: It must be open to a . .
Cited – Kopecky v Slovakia ECHR 28-Sep-2004
(Grand Chamber) The court said of the practice of the Convention institutions under A1 P1: ‘An applicant can allege a violation of article 1 of Protocol 1 only in so far as the impugned decisions related to his ‘possessions’ within the meaning of . .
Cited – Jackson and others v Attorney General HL 13-Oct-2005
The applicant sought to challenge the 2004 Hunting Act, saying that it had been passed under the provisions of the 1949 Parliament Act which was itself an unlawful extension of the powers given by the 1911 Parliament Act to allow the House of . .
Cited – Marckx v Belgium ECHR 13-Jun-1979
Recognition of illegitimate children
The complaint related to the manner in which parents were required to adopt their own illegitimate child in order to increase his rights. Under Belgian law, no legal bond between an unmarried mother and her child results from the mere fact of birth. . .
Cited – Willis v The United Kingdom ECHR 11-Jun-2002
Discrimination in the payment of ‘widows payment’ and widowed mother’s allowance infringed the rights conferred by article 14 read with article 1 of Protocol 1 but no finding was made about the widow’s pension. The risk of the applicant being . .
Cited – Young, James and Webster v The United Kingdom ECHR 13-Aug-1981
Employees claimed religious objections to being obliged to members of a Trades Union.
Held: It is the obligation of states which have ratified the Convention to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms which it . .
Cited – Pressos Compania Naviera S A And Others v Belgium ECHR 20-Nov-1995
When determining whether a claimant has possessions or property within the meaning of Article I the court may have regard to national law and will generally do so unless the national law is incompatible with the object and purpose of Article 1. Any . .
Cited – Maurice v France ECHR 2005
. .
Cited – Edinburgh District Council v Secretary of State for Scotland SCS 1985
Inner House . .
Cited – Somerville v Scottish Ministers HL 24-Oct-2007
The claimants complained of their segregation while in prison. Several preliminary questions were to be decided: whether damages might be payable for breach of a Convention Right; wheher the act of a prison governor was the act of the executive; . .
Cited – James and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 21-Feb-1986
The claimants challenged the 1967 Act, saying that it deprived them of their property rights when lessees were given the power to purchase the freehold reversion.
Held: Article 1 (P1-1) in substance guarantees the right of property. Allowing a . .
Cited – Broniowski v Poland ECHR 22-Jun-2004
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection dismissed (non-exhaustion of domestic remedies) ; Violation of P1-1 ; Just satisfaction reserved ; Costs and expenses partial award – Convention . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Environment, ex parte Nottinghamshire County Council HL 12-Dec-1985
The House heard a judicial review of the Secretary of State’s assessment of the proper level of expenditure by a local authority.
Held: A ‘low intensity’ of review is applied to cases involving issues ‘depending essentially on political . .
Cited – Secretary of State for the Home Department v Asif Javed and Zuifiqar Ali and Abid Ali CA 17-May-2001
A designation of Pakistan as a safe place for the return of a failed asylum applicant was unlawful because there was plain evidence that persecution of women who left the marital home, whether voluntarily or by compulsion, was widespread. . .
Cited – Regina v Director of Public Prosecutions, ex parte Kebilene and others HL 28-Oct-1999
(Orse Kebeline) The DPP’s appeal succeeded. A decision by the DPP to authorise a prosecution could not be judicially reviewed unless dishonesty, bad faith, or some other exceptional circumstance could be shown. A suggestion that the offence for . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State ex parte Hammersmith and Fulham London Borough Council HL 4-Oct-1990
16 local authorities joined together to challenge the bringing in of the community charge, and of rules giving central government a greater say over management of local finance by local authorities.
Held: Acts which are essentially political . .
Cited – West v Secretary of State for Scotland SCS 23-Apr-1992
The petitioner complained that on being moved from his employment at one prison to another, he had been told that his moving expenses would be paid, but that they were not. The respondent said that the terms of his employment were that he was to be . .
Cited – West v Secretary of State for Scotland SCS 1992
The court asked what was to be considered to be truly an application to the supervisory jurisdiction of the court.
Held: Lord President (Hope): ‘The public or private nature of the inferior body or tribunal is not decisive, nor is it necessary . .
Cited – Forbes v Underwood 1886
The supervisory jurisdiction of the Court of Session was used to compel an arbiter to proceed with an arbitration agreed under a private contract. . .
Cited – D and J Nicol v Dundee Harbour Trustees HL 10-Dec-1914
Whether a corporation created by a statute has a particular power depends exclusively on whether that power has been expressly given to it by the statute regulating it, or can be implied from the language used.
Lord Dunedin declared: ‘By the . .
Cited – McDonald v Burns SCS 29-Mar-1940
. .
Cited – St Johnstone Football Club v Scottish Football Association Ltd 1965
The Supervisory jurisdiction of the Court of Session was available to check whether the proceedings leading to a disciplinary decision of the Scottish Football Association, a private association, had been conducted in accordance with natural . .
Cited – X v United Kingdom ECHR 5-Nov-1981
(Commission) The application was made a patient, restricted under the 1959 Act. A mental health review tribunal which concluded that the continued detention of a restricted patient was no longer justified had power to recommend but not to order the . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex parte Bindel 2001
A women’s group objected to the visit to the United Kingdom of Mike Tyson, a convicted rapist, so that he could earn money here by appearing in the boxing ring.
Held: Justice for Women did not have arguable grounds for interfering with the . .
Cited – Rape Crisis Centre v Secretary of State for the Home Department 2000
The petitioner sought judicial review of a decision to allow the boxer Mike Tyson to visit the UK.
Held: The Immigration Rules conferred no express or implied rights on third parties such as the petitioners. A review was refused.
Lord . .
Cited – Barker v Corus (UK) Plc HL 3-May-2006
The claimants sought damages after contracting meselothemia working for the defendants. The defendants argued that the claimants had possibly contracted the disease at any one or more different places. The Fairchild case set up an exception to the . .
Cited – Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others HL 20-Jun-2002
The claimants suffered mesothelioma after contact with asbestos while at work. Their employers pointed to several employments which might have given rise to the condition, saying it could not be clear which particular employment gave rise to the . .
Cited – Zielinski v France ECHR 28-Oct-1999
Hudoc The applicants challenged a retrospective change in employment law under article 6(1).
Held: The court stated that while in principle the legislature is not precluded in civil matters from adopting . .
Cited – Campbell and Cosans v The United Kingdom ECHR 25-Feb-1982
To exclude a child from school for as long as his parents refused to let him be beaten ‘cannot be described as reasonable and in any event falls outside the State’s power of regulation in article 2’. The Convention protects only religions and . .
Cited – Mellacher and Others v Austria ECHR 19-Dec-1989
The case concerned restrictions on the rent that a property owner could charge. The restrictions were applied to existing leases. It was said that the restrictions brought into play the second paragraph of Article 1 of the First Protocol to the . .
Cited – Lithgow And Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 8-Jul-1986
The applicants complained that on the nationalisation of their interests under the 1977 Act, the compensation awarded had been inadequate and did not reflect their true value.
Held: Convention jurisprudence permits a proportionate restriction . .
Cited – Sienkiewicz v Greif (UK) Ltd; Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council v Willmore SC 9-Mar-2011
The Court considered appeals where defendants challenged the factual basis of findings that they had contributed to the causes of the claimant’s Mesothelioma, and in particular to what extent a court can satisfactorily base conclusions of fact on . .
Cited – Vijayanathan and Pusparajah v France ECHR 27-Aug-1992
Where a person is not at risk of a violation of a Convention right unless and until a particular decision is taken, for example as to deportation, the person cannot claim to be a victim unless and until such a decision is in fact made.
. .
Cited – Open Door and Dublin Well Woman v Ireland ECHR 29-Oct-1992
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Lack of jurisdiction (Art. 8); Preliminary objection rejected (victim); Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Preliminary objection rejected . .
Cited – Gorraiz Lizarraga et Autres v Espagne ECHR 27-Apr-2004
(French Text) An excessively formalistic interpretation of the concept of a ‘victim’ would make protection of the rights guaranteed by the Convention ineffectual and illusory. . .
Cited – Burden and Burden v The United Kingdom ECHR 29-Apr-2008
(Grand Chamber) The claimants were sisters who had lived together all their lives. They complained of discrimination in their treatment under the Inheritance Tax system as opposed to the treatment of a same sex couple living in a sexual . .
Cited – Wasa Liv Omsesidigt v Sweden ECHR 14-Dec-1988
Commission . .
Cited – Agrotexim and Others v Greece ECHR 24-Oct-1995
Hudoc Not necessary to examine preliminary objection (ratione temporis); Preliminary objection allowed (victim); Lack of jurisdiction (complaint inadmissible, new complaint)
The applicant companies held . .
Cited – National Westminster Bank plc v Spectrum Plus Limited and others HL 30-Jun-2005
Former HL decision in Siebe Gorman overruled
The company had become insolvent. The bank had a debenture and claimed that its charge over the book debts had become a fixed charge. The preferential creditors said that the charge was a floating charge and that they took priority.
Held: The . .
Cited – Iatridis v Greece ECHR 25-Mar-1999
Hudoc Judgment (Merits and just satisfaction) Preliminary objection rejected (non-exhaustion); Preliminary objection rejected (six month period); Violation of P1-1; Violation of Art. 13; Not necessary to examine . .
Cited – Whaley v Lord Watson SCS 16-Feb-2000
The Scottish Parliament and its members have a limited statutory immunity from suit. No interdict or other order could be made against a member of the Parliament if the effect would be to grant an order against the Parliament not otherwise . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for The Home Department Ex Parte Simms HL 8-Jul-1999
Ban on Prisoners talking to Journalists unlawful
The two prisoners, serving life sentences for murder, had had their appeals rejected. They continued to protest innocence, and sought to bring their campaigns to public attention through the press, having oral interviews with journalists without . .
Cited – Rossi v Magistrates of Edinburgh HL 1904
Conditions in an ice-cream vendors’ licence which restricted their right to open their shops when they liked and sell what they pleased were held to be ultra vires of the licensing authority. The court applied the rule that while the legislature may . .
Cited – Brown v Hamilton District Council HL 25-Nov-1982
The pursuer sought a declaration that he was a homeless person and therefore entitled to assistance.
Held: Lord Fraser of Tullybelton said that it was for consideration whether there might not be advantages in developing special procedure in . .
Cited – Regina v Secretary of State for the Home Department ex parte Anufrijeva HL 26-Jun-2003
The appellant challenged the withdrawal of her benefits payments. She had applied for asylum, and been granted reduced rate income support. A decision was made refusing her claim, but that decision was, by policy, not communicated to her for several . .
Cited – Stevenson v Midlothian District Council HL 1983
The pursuer was an undischarged bankrupt. The Lord Ordinary ordered him to find caution, although he was in receipt of legal aid. He said that he had had regard to the nature of the action and the pleadings, as well as to the fact that he was an . .
Cited – Wilson v Independent Broadcasting Authority OHCS 1979
In the lead up to the Scottish referendum on Devolution, the Authority required the broadcasters to carry party political broadcasts for each of the four main parties. Three parties favoured voting yes in the referendum, and the authority was . .
Cited – Scottish Old People’s Welfare Council, Petitioners SCS 1987
The organisation (‘Age Concern Scotland’) challenged guidance issued by the chief adjudication officer regarding social security payments for severe weather conditions. Lord Clyde concluded that any member of the public, or an association such as . .
Cited – Sutherland District Council v Secretary of State for Scotland SCS 23-Dec-1987
Lord Clyde discussed the rule restricting the class of people who might bring judicial review: ‘Paragraph (14) envisages that interested parties may be permitted to enter the process more freely than in the case of an ordinary action and so enable . .
Cited – Casey v Edinburgh Airport Ltd SCS 23-Feb-1989
There was a challenge to decisions taken by the airport authority, under a bye-law, to refuse permits to the applicant taxi operators. During the hearing, the applicants sought to challenge the validity of the bye-law itself.
Held: Lord . .
Cited – EBA v Advocate General for Scotland SC 21-Jun-2011
The appellant had sought to challenge refusal of disability living allowance. Ultimately her request a judicial review of the Upper Tribunal’s decion was rejected on the basis that the UT, being a court of superior record, was not susceptible to . .
Cited – Air 2000 v Secretary of State for Transport (No 2) OHCS 1990
Advice from the Civil Aviation Authority which by statute the Secretary of State was required to consider had been seen not by him but by an interdepartmental working party which advised him.
Held: Citing Carltona for the uncontroversial . .

Cited by:

Cited – ANS and Another v ML SC 11-Jul-2012
The mother opposed adoption proceedings, and argued that the provision in the 2007 Act, allowing a court to dispense with her consent, infringed her rights under Article 8 and was therefore made outwith the powers of the Scottish Parliament.
Cited – Imperial Tobacco Ltd v The Lord Advocate SC 12-Dec-2012
The claimant company said that the 2010 Act was outside the competence of the Scottish Parliament insofar as it severely restricted the capacity of those selling cigarettes to display them for sale. They suggested two faults. First, that the subject . .
Cited – Walton v The Scottish Ministers SC 17-Oct-2012
The appellant, former chair of a road activist group, challenged certain roads orders saying that the respondent had not carried out the required environmental assessment. His claim was that the road had been adopted without the consultation . .
Cited – Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 – Reference By The Attorney General for England and Wales SC 21-Nov-2012
Under the 1998 and 2006 Acts, the Welsh Assembly was empowered to pass legislation subject to confirmation by the English Parliament Secretary of State. The Local Government Byelaws (Wales) Bill 2012 was passed by the Assembly and purported to . .
Cited – Chester, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Justice SC 16-Oct-2013
The two applicants were serving life sentences for murder. Each sought damages for the unlawful withdrawal of their rights to vote in elections, and the failure of the British parliament to take steps to comply with the judgment.
Held: The . .
Cited – Recovery of Medical Costs for Asbestos Diseases (Wales) Bill (Reference By The Counsel General for Wales) SC 9-Feb-2015
The court was asked whether the Bill was within the competence of the Welsh Assembly. The Bill purported to impose NHS charges on those from whom asbestos related damages were recovered.
Held: The Bill fell outside the legislative competence . .
Cited – Nicklinson and Another, Regina (on The Application of) SC 25-Jun-2014
Criminality of Assisting Suicide not Infringing
The court was asked: ‘whether the present state of the law of England and Wales relating to assisting suicide infringes the European Convention on Human Rights, and whether the code published by the Director of Public Prosecutions relating to . .
Cited – Evans and Another, Regina (on The Application of) v Attorney General SC 26-Mar-2015
The Attorney General appealed against a decision for the release under the Act and Regulations of letters from HRH The Prince of Wales to various ministers and government departments.
Held: The appeal failed (Majority). The A-G had not been . .
Cited – Coventry and Others v Lawrence and Another SC 22-Jul-2015
The appellants challenged the compatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights of the system for recovery of costs in civil litigation in England and Wales following the passing of the Access to Justice Act 1999. The parties had been . .
Cited – Cherry, Reclaiming Motion By Joanna Cherry QC MP and Others v The Advocate General SCS 11-Sep-2019
(First Division, Inner House) The reclaimer challenged dismissal of her claim for review of the recent decision for the prorogation of the Parliament at Westminster.
Held: Reclaim was granted. The absence of reasons allowed the court to infer . .
Cited – Mott, Regina (on The Application of) v The Environment Agency and Another Admn 13-Feb-2015
The claimant challenged new conditions imposed on licences to operate his salmon fishery in the Severn Estuary, which operated to defeat his tenancy of the fishery.
Held: The request for review succeeded. The decisions to impose the catch . .
Cited – Mott, Regina (on The Application of) v Environment Agency and Another CA 17-Jun-2016
The applicant challenged restrictions on salmon fishing imposed by the respondent. At first instance they were held to be irrational, and the Agency appealed.
Held: The Regulations were not irrational and that element of the appeal succeeded, . .
Cited – Mott, Regina (on The Application of) v Environment Agency SC 14-Feb-2018
The Court considered the legality under the European Convention on Human Rights of licensing conditions imposed by the Environment Agency restricting certain forms of salmon-fishing in the Severn Estuary. The claimant operated a licensed putcher . .
Cited – Welsh Ministers v PJ SC 17-Dec-2018
A patient detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) may be released from compulsory detention in hospital subject to a community treatment order. The question arising on this appeal is whether a patient’s responsible clinician (may impose . .
Cited – DA and Others, Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions SC 15-May-2019
Several lone parents challenged the benefits cap, saying that it was discriminatory.
Held: (Hale, Kerr LL dissenting) The parents’ appeals failed. The legislation had a clear impact on lone parents and their children. The intention was to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Human Rights, Constitutional, Judicial Review

Leading Case

Updated: 07 February 2022; Ref: scu.445395

McDonnell v Henry: CANI 13 Apr 2005

Appeal from the decision of Girvan J dismissing the plaintiff’s claim for damages for personal injuries, loss and damage sustained by him as the result of an accident which occurred while he was attempting to start a cement mixer with a starting handle. The accident occurred at the defendant’s premises and the plaintiff claims that he was employed by the defendant at the material time. Alternatively, he claims that he was entitled to succeed in his claim against the defendant on the basis that the latter was in breach of certain employment and health and safety legislation and his common law obligations to the plaintiff.

Judges:

Kerr LCJ, Campbell LJ and Sir Liam Mccollum

Citations:

[2005] NICA 17

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Northern Ireland

Personal Injury

Updated: 07 February 2022; Ref: scu.224134

Phee v Gordon and Another: SCS 14 Mar 2013

(Extra Division – Inner House) – Appeal – liability in negligence of golf club after serious injury to novice golfer being hit on head by a golf ball. The player had cried ‘fore’, but the pursuer, instead of turning away, turned toward the ball. The club had not taken particular steps to inform golfers of know pinch points on the course.

Citations:

[2013] ScotCS CSIH – 18, 2013 GWD 11-235, 2013 SLT 439, 2013 SC 379, 2013 Rep LR 79

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability (Scotland) Act 1960 2(1)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.472126

Drake and another v Foster Wheeler Ltd: QBD 5 Aug 2010

The claimant sought damages for asbestosis. He had been given Hospice care in the period up to his death. A claim was made for the costs of such voluntary care, suggesting a parallel with a claim which might be made by a relative providing voluntary care.
Held: The claim succeeded. The claim was novel, arguing that the defendant should not be able to deduct from damages payable savings made when a third party offered gratuitous charitable care. The claim was in line with established principles and it was unlikely to lead to substantial numbers of claims.

Judges:

Thornton QC J

Citations:

[2010] EWHC 2004 (QB), [2010] WLR (D) 232

Links:

WLRD

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.421531

Casson v Hudson and Another: CA 3 Mar 2017

Appeal against the dismissal of a claim for damages in respect of injuries sustained by him when he fell from a ladder, while carrying out decorating work.

Judges:

Patten, Sales, David Richards LJJ

Citations:

[2017] EWCA Civ 125

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 06 February 2022; Ref: scu.578203