Category: Personal Injury

Bailey and Others v Glaxosmithkline (UK) Ltd: QBD 14 Feb 2019

Action for damages for personal injury, brought by a number of Claimants, in which it is alleged that Seroxat (the UK brand name for Paroxetine, a prescription only antidepressant and anxiolytic) is defective within the meaning of the Consumer Protection Act 1987.

Judges:

Lambert J

Citations:

[2019] EWHC 337 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 06 July 2022; Ref: scu.638197

McMminn v McMinn and Another: QBD 11 Apr 2006

The claimant had been severely injured in a car crash when his younger brother was driving. The driver did not have the owner’s permission to drive, and the insurer sought to avoid laibility.
Held: ‘insurers do not have to prove that the injured passenger actually believed that the vehicle had been stolen or unlawfully taken. What has to be proved is that the injured passenger had the information . . . which would have afforded him good reasons for believing that the vehicle had been stolen or unlawfully taken had he applied his mind to the topic. Shutting one’s eyes to the obvious is therefore enough, provided that it would indeed have been obvious to the injured passenger if he had thought about it. ‘ because of the knowledge found as a fact in the claimant of the circumstances, the insurer could properly refuse its indemnity.

Judges:

Keith J

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 827 (QB), Times 02-May-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988 151 145, Second EEC Motor Insurance Directive 84/5/EEC

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v Phipps CACD 1970
Where a person has been given permission by the owner of a motor vehicle to take and use it for a particular purpose, but on completion of that purpose fails to return it and thereafter uses it without any reasonable belief that the owner would . .
Cited – White v White and The Motor Insurers Bureau HL 1-Mar-2001
The requirements as to the extent of knowledge in the mind of a passenger sufficient to defeat a claim against the Motor Insurers Bureau, of the driver’s lack of insurance, was actual knowledge. The rules implemented a European Directive which . .
Cited – McNight v Davies 1974
The court considered whether a driver had teken a vehicle without the owners consent, and having had that consent for one purpose, continued to use the car beyond that purpose: ‘[n]ot every brief, unauthorised diversion from his proper route by an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Insurance, Personal injury

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240426

Gray v Fire Alarm Fabrication Services Ltd and others: QBD 3 Mar 2006

The deceased, a maintenance engineer died after falling through a skylight at work. The court considered the respective liabilities of his employer and the landowner.

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 849 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clay v AJ Crump and Sons Ltd CA 1964
An architect, a demolition contractor and a building contractor were each held liable to an employee of building contractors for the collapse of a wall which, with the architect’s approval, demolition contractors had left standing.
Held: As . .
Cited – Mccook v Lobo and others CA 19-Nov-2002
The defendant was the occupier of premises. He did not direct how the work should be done and was not present at the time the work was being performed.
Held: He had not been in control of the relevant work. Judge LJ referred to Regulation 4(2) . .
Cited – Ferguson v Welsh HL 29-Oct-1987
The plaintiff sought damages for personal injury. A council had engaged a competent contractor to carry out demolition works. Unknown to the council, the contractor sub-contracted the works to two brothers who worked in a highly dangerous manner. . .
Cited – McArdle v Andmac Roofing Co 1967
. .
Cited – Smith v UMB Chrysler (Scotland) Ltd HL 9-Nov-1977
The principles set out in Canada Steamship apply to ‘clauses which purport to exempt one party to a contract from liability’. The principles should be applied without ‘mechanistic construction’.
Lord Keith of Kinkel said: The tests were . .
Cited – Mccook v Lobo and others CA 19-Nov-2002
The defendant was the occupier of premises. He did not direct how the work should be done and was not present at the time the work was being performed.
Held: He had not been in control of the relevant work. Judge LJ referred to Regulation 4(2) . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240441

Tesco Stores Ltd and Another v P (A Minor) and Another: CA 12 Apr 2006

The claimant, a 13 month old boy, had by mistake drunk from a bottle of dishwasher powder sold and manufactured by the various defendants. The bottle had a child resistant closure. The court considered how much force the boy would have been able to apply, and how much was needed.
Held: The question was whether the ability to open the bottle demonstrated a defect in it. ‘The test is, and is only, ‘what persons generally are entitled to expect’ and ‘ they were entitled to expect that the bottle would be more difficult to open than if it had an ordinary screwtop. ‘ The test could not be made more specific. In this case there was no breach of the 1987 Act. The appeal succeeded. The defendants were not liable.

Judges:

Laws LJ, Wilson LJ, Sir Paul Kennedy

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 393

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Consumer Protection Act 1987 2, Chemical (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) Regulations 1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240363

McKew v Holland and Hannan and Cubitts: HL 26 Nov 1969

The appellant had been injured in the course of his employment for which the respondents were liable. Sometimes his left leg would gave way beneath him. He was descending a steep staircase without a handrail when the leg collapsed and he tried to jump down the stairs so that he would land in a standing position rather than falling over down the stairs. He suffered a severe fracture of his ankle.
Held: Lord Reid: ‘In my view the law is clear. If a man is injured in such a way that his leg may give way at any moment he must act reasonably and carefully. It is quite possible that in spite of all reasonable care his leg may give way in circumstances such that as a result he sustains further injury. Then that second injury was caused by his disability which in turn was caused by the defender’s fault. But if the injured man acts unreasonably he cannot hold the defender liable for injury caused by his own unreasonable conduct. His unreasonable conduct is novus actus interveniens. The chain of causation has been broken and what follows must be regarded as caused by his own conduct and not by the defender’s fault or the disability caused by it. Or one may say that unreasonable conduct of the pursuer and what follows from it is not the natural and probable result of the original fault of the defender or of the ensuing disability. I do not think that foreseeability comes into this. A defender is not liable for a consequence of a kind which is not foreseeable. But it does not follow that he is liable for every consequence which a reasonable man could foresee. What can be foreseen depends almost entirely on the facts of the case, and it is often easy to foresee unreasonable conduct or some other nouvs actus interveniens as being quite likely. But that does not mean that the defender must pay for damage caused by the nouvs actus. It only leads to trouble that if one tries to graft on to the concept of foreseeability some rule of law to the effect that a wrongdoer is not bound to foresee something which in fact he could readily foresee as quite likely to happen. For it is not at all unlikely or unforeseeable that an active man who has suffered such a disability will take some quite unreasonable risk. But if he does he cannot hold the defender liable for the consequences.
So in my view the question here is whether the second accident was caused by the appellant doing something unreasonable.’

Judges:

Lord Reid

Citations:

[1969] UKHL 9, [1969] 3 All ER 1621, [1969] UKHL 12

Links:

Bailii, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd CA 31-Mar-2006
The deceased had suffered a head injury whilst working for the defendant. In addition to severe physical consequences he suffered post-traumatic stress, became more and more depressed, and then committed suicide six years later. The claimant . .
Cited – Spencer v Wincanton Holdings Ltd (Wincanton Logistics Ltd) CA 21-Dec-2009
The claimant suffered injury for which he sought compensation from his employers. He later had to have his leg amputated as a consequence, but then through his own inadvertence suffered further injury to his other leg and a complete loss of . .
Cited – Spencer v Wincanton Holdings Ltd (Wincanton Logistics Ltd) CA 21-Dec-2009
The claimant suffered injury for which he sought compensation from his employers. He later had to have his leg amputated as a consequence, but then through his own inadvertence suffered further injury to his other leg and a complete loss of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.240041

Denton Hall Legal Services and others v Fifield: CA 8 Mar 2006

The court gave guidance on the procedures to be adopted to avoid difficulties arising from factual differences between medical experts.
Buxton LJ discussed the status of quotations recorded by the doctor examining a claimant, saying: ‘What the doctor writes down as having been told him by the patient, as opposed to the opinion that he expresses on the basis of those statements, is not at that stage evidence of the making of the statement that he records.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Jonathan Parker, Lord Justice Buxton, Lord Justice Wall

Citations:

Times 22-Mar-2006, [2006] EWCA Civ 169

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Charnock and Others v Rowan and Others CA 20-Jan-2012
14 passengers in a bus hit from behind at a slow speed had all claimed whiplash injury. The expert had said that the accepted speed required to produce such an injury was a change of 3mph, which would require an impact at 30mph, whereas the evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238897

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 having been struck out, the judge retained his discretion to disapply the limitation period, following Walkley.
Held: ‘I simply do not understand how it can be argued that because the first action brought out of time would not have been prejudiced by section 11 if the defendants did not or would not successfully have taken the limitation point, therefore the second action is not prejudiced by section 11. The second action is under direct threat of being defeated by a time-bar defence. ‘ Walkley was anomalous and should be confined to its facts. ‘Because the judge misdirected himself in material respects, we must exercise our own discretion. The question is whether it is equitable to allow the action to proceed. The answer is given by balancing the prejudice to the plaintiff against the prejudice to the defendant having regard to the specific factors and all the circumstances of the case. In summary this is a long delay, some of it unexplained. That delay is, however, mitigated by the fact that the defendant had very early notice of the claim, admitted liability and was well on the road to preparing to meet the damages claim when the guillotine fell. ‘

Judges:

Lady Justice Arden DBE Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Dyson

Citations:

[2006] 1 WLR 1330, [2006] EWCA Civ 91, Times 06-Mar-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 11(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Confined to its facts – 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 . .
Cited – Chappell v Cooper CA 1980
The plaintiff’s writ had not been served within the required time, and it had become too late to extend its validity. The plaintiff isued a second writ. The defendant argued limitation. Counsel for the plaintiffs sought to distinguish Walkley on the . .
Cited – Thompson v Brown Construction (Ebbw Vale) Ltd HL 1981
The plaintiff’s solicitors, out of negligence, failed to issue a writ until one month after the limitation period had expired. The application to extend the period was rejected at first instance since he had an unanswerable claim against his . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 – Deerness v John R Keeble and Son (Brantham) Ltd HL 1983
The plaintiff suffered very serious injuries as a passenger in a car, and a writ was issued within the three-year period against the driver and the owner of the car whose insurers made a substantial interim payment. The writ was not served, nor . .
Cited – Shapland v Palmer CA 23-Mar-1999
The plaintiff’s car was struck by a company car driven by the defendant in the course of her employment and she sought damages. Her action, against the employer, was struck out as late under the 1980 Act. She then commenced an action against the . .
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 – KR and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Another CA 12-Feb-2003
The respondent appealed decisions by the court to allow claims for personal injury out of time. The claims involved cases of sexual abuse inflicted by its employees going back over many years.
Held: The judge had misapplied the test laid down . .
Cited – Donovan v Gwentoys Ltd HL 1990
The plaintiff, then a 16 year old girl slipped and fell whilst employed at the defendant’s factory. The limitation period expired on her 21st birthday. She commenced proceedings five and a half months after that date. The judge extended time under . .

Cited by:

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.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238659

Burgess v Plymouth City Council: CA 30 Dec 2005

The claimant fell over plastic lunch boxes at the school at which she worked as a cleaner. The judge had held that the school was in breach of the regulations, and was liable but the claimant was 50% contributorially negligent. The defendant argued that as a cleaner it was her task to tidy the floors.
Held: The duty to tidy the floors was not determinative of the case. ‘if the system had been operated correctly the accident would not have happened . . It was inevitable that there would be a substantial finding of contributory negligence. Mrs Burgess had entered the room through a door leading precisely to the point where the obstruction was placed. It was a large and conspicuous obstruction. It was reasonable to expect that to make her job easier and for her own safety she would move the lunch box container to its normal safe position. However, she was not keeping a proper lookout and she failed to see an obvious hazard. ‘

Judges:

The Master of the Rolls, Sir Anthony Clarke, Lady Justice Smith Lord Justice Maurice Kay

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1659

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulation 1992 1293)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Anderson v Newham College of Further Education CA 25-Mar-2002
Sedley LJ said that: ‘people do not always look where they are going.’ Where the claimant was wholly to blame for the accident and there could be no liability on the defendant colege. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238626

Bailey v Warre: CA 7 Feb 2006

The claimant had been severely injured in a road traffic accident. His claim was compromised and embodied in a court order, but later a question was raised as to whether he had had mental capacity at the time to make the compromise he had.
Held: The term ‘patient’ in this context had a meaning specific to the rules. A claimant could not become a patient within those rules until the commencement of the action. The compromise was valid and binding. In any event the actual agreement might well have been appropriate.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Arden LJ, Hallett LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 51, Times 20-Feb-2006

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 821.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Kirby v Leather CA 1965
The plaintiff crashed into a van whilst riding his moped and suffered serious brain damage. An inquiry as to a party’s competence to conduct a case had to focus on his capacity to conduct the proceedings. In this case the plaintiff ‘was not capable . .
Cited – Dietz v Lennig Chemicals Limited HL 1969
Before proceedings, the plaintiff widow accepted the defendants’ offer to settle her and her infant son’s Fatal Accidents Acts claim ‘subject to the approval of the court’. A summons was then issued for the court to approve that settlement. The . .
Cited – Drinkall (A Minor Who Sues By Her Mother and Litigation Friend) v Whitwood CA 6-Nov-2003
The claimant, a child, had sought damages. An agreement was made to compromise the claim. Later the child sought to withdraw from it.
Held: No court order had been made to approve the compromise, and therefore no binding arrangement existed. . .
Cited – White v Fell 12-Nov-1987
The court was asked to decide whether the claimant had been incapable of managing her property and affairs in the context of a Limitation Act defence.
Held: There are three features to which it is appropriate to have regard when assessing a . .
Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-2002
Capacity for Litigation
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the . .
Cited – Chapman v Hearse, Baker v Willoughby HL 26-Nov-1969
The plaintiff, a pedestrian had been struck by the defendant’s car while crossing the road. The plaintiff had negligently failed to see the defendant’s car approaching. The defendant had a clear view of the plaintiff prior to the collision, but was . .
Cited – Eagle v Chambers CA 24-Jul-2003
The claimant was severely injured when run down by the defendant driving his car. She was in Blackpool, and drunk and wandering in the highway. The defendant was himself at or near the drink driving limit. She appealed against a finding that she was . .
Cited – Gillick v West Norfolk and Wisbech Area Health Authority and Department of Health and Social Security HL 17-Oct-1985
Lawfulness of Contraceptive advice for Girls
The claimant had young daughters. She challenged advice given to doctors by the second respondent allowing them to give contraceptive advice to girls under 16, and the right of the first defendant to act upon that advice. She objected that the . .
Cited – Re K (Enduring Powers of Attorney), In re F ChD 1988
The court allowed an appeal against the decision of the Master of the Court of Protection refusing registration to an enduring power of attorney on the ground that the donor, although capable of understanding the nature of the power, was herself . .
Cited – McNicol v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Limited CA 26-Jul-2002
The Disability Rights Commission sought leave to intervene in a claim between the parties for disability discrimination.
Held: The Commission has important duties, but that did not give it the right, save in exceptional circumstances, to . .
Cited – Re Birchall; Wilson v Birchall CA 1880
In the administration of his estate the widow of the deceased took out a summons asking for a declaration that a large amount of personal property was held by the deceased as trustee for her and so did not fall into his estate. A compromise was . .
Cited – Liddell v Middleton CA 17-Jul-1995
A husband and wife crossed a road. The wife, appreciating that the danger from the traffic, ran across. The husband stood in the middle of the road and then went ahead, but was struck by a vehicle and injured. He was significantly affected by . .
Cited – In Re E (Mental Health Patient) 1985
Application for an order with regard to a mental health patient’s property. . .
Cited – Imperial Loan Co v Stone CA 1892
Contract without Capacity – Voidable not Void
A person of unsound mind was sued on a promissory note. He had signed it as surety. The jury found that he was insane when he signed the note but there was no finding as to the creditor’s knowledge of such insanity. The judge entered a verdict . .
Cited – Re Taylor’s Application 1972
If the approval of the litigation friend is required and it appears that the litigation friend is acting unreasonably in withholding his consent, steps can be taken to remove him and appoint another litigation friend in his place. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238340

Jackson v Ministry of Defence: CA 12 Jan 2006

andpound;150,000 was paid into court but the claimant recovered andpound;155,000 and the judge ordered the defendant to pay 75% of the claimant’s costs. The defendant appealed. The judge had decided that when the claimant gave his evidence there was a significant degree of exaggeration.
Held: The appeal was dismissed. The defendant was the successful party because the whole trial was about whether the claimant had exaggerated his claim, and the defendant had had opportunities to manage the result by payments into court.
Tuckey LJ said: ‘Persuasively and persistently though these submissions were put, I do not accept them. The claimant was successful in the sense that he established a claim for substantial damages and beat the payment into court, albeit by a small margin. The defendant was perfectly able to protect itself against the fact that it faced an exaggerated claim. As most defendants do in such circumstances, it had access to experienced lawyers and, if necessary, experts to evaluate the strength of the claim it faced. It could with the benefit of such advice – and perhaps with the benefit of hindsight in this case should have – made an earlier Part 36 payment into court, and certainly could have increased that payment into court by making a further payment after the unsuccessful settlement meeting. The judge took into account the fact that the claimant had only just beaten the payment in which had been made, as I have already said. What is more, the judge made it clear that it was open to the defendant to challenge specific items relating to the abandoned claims, such as the costs of the experts which were not relied on at trial, at the detailed assessment, where of course the claimant will only be able to recover costs which were reasonably incurred . . The reduction which the judge made – and the reduction which we can anticipate the costs judge is likely to make – must act as a considerable disincentive to claimants and their advisers against making exaggerated claims. The case of Painting is, as Miss Griffiths accepted, an exceptional case where the claimant persisted in a claim for andpound;400,000 at trial and was awarded about andpound;25,000 at the end of the process.’

Judges:

Tuckey LJ, Keene LJ, Wilson LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 46

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Widlake v BAA Ltd CA 23-Nov-2009
The claimant had succeeded in her action for personal injuries, but now appealed against the awarding of costs to the defendant. The dispute had been substantialy as to the nature and effect of her injuries. She had not disclosed earlier injury to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238305

Healy v Cosmosair Plc and others: QBD 28 Jul 2005

The claimant sought damages after being injured diving into a swimming pool in Portugal when on a holiday organised by the defendants. He said that the surrounds of the pool were not provided with appropriate non-slip surfaces. The defendant said that there were explicit warnings against diving. The claimant said that he slipped.
Held: The claimant had failed to establish that any negligence of the defendant had contributed to the injury he suffered.

Judges:

Eady J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1657 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clough v First Choice Holidays and Flights Ltd QBD 2005
‘Mr Saggerson [then appearing for the Defendant] made the point . . that there is always a risk of slipping around a swimming pool. That, I am sure, is the common experience of everyone who uses a swimming pool, whether at home or abroad. In those . .
Cited – James v Preseli District Council CA 1992
In the context of an alleged failure to maintain a highway, the question in each case is whether the particular spot where the claimant tripped or fell was dangerous: ‘if the particular spot was not dangerous, then it is irrelevant that there were . .
Cited – Hone v Going Places Leisure Travel Ltd and Another CA 13-Jun-2001
The regulations could not be read to impose strict liability on a tour organiser or holiday ticket retailer for injury suffered during the holiday. The rules clearly required there to be shown some ‘improper performance’ of the contract before . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.229754

Littlefair, Williamson, and Beardall v Vinamul Ltd: CA 1 Feb 2006

The parties had been involved in personal injury litigation, which the defendants said had been compromised on a drop hands basis. The claimants wished to go ahead.
Held: The parties legal representatives had not sufficiently recorded their dealings. However notes on both sides of telephone conversations spelled out that the claimants were not proceedings with claims for one aspect of their injury, and that claim could not proceed.

Judges:

Latham LJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 31

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.238248

C (a Child) v The Home Office and the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority: CA 3 Mar 2004

The applicant child had incurred legal expenses in applying to the Authority for compensation. The claim was successful, but the applicant was unable to rcover the expenses, and now said that that refusal infringed his human rights, since he would otherwise be unable to pursue such an action.
Held: The failure to pay legal expenses was an express part of the scheme. An application was a determination of the applicant’s civil rights, but to say that a part of the compensation on account had to be expended to pursue the claim was not a denial of rights. There was no obligation on the scheme to provide for payment of expenses.

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 234, Times 01-Mar-2004, Gazette 01-Apr-2004

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs, Human Rights

Updated: 05 July 2022; Ref: scu.194109

Clough v First Choice Holidays and Flights Ltd: CA 25 Jan 2006

The appellant broke his neck slipping from a wall in a swimming pool in Lanzarote. The wall was not coated with fully non-slip paint. At first instance the failure to use such paint was held negligent for the purpose of the contract between them and the appellant, and a breach of contract. A physical barrier should have been provided around the wall for the protection, not of adults, but of children. The claimant had decided to go to the pool wall significantly affected by drink and he took the risk on his own shoulders. He slipped on a surface which should have been, but was not, painted with non-slip paint. His feet were wet, but by walking where he did and being where he was, he was not doing anything abnormal nor prohibited by the rules of the complex. The claim failed at first instance on causation, the judge concluding that the negligence and breach of duty lacked causative potency. A relaxed approach to causation could not apply, and that it was impossible to conclude that but for an essentially unquantifiable increased risk of slipping from not using non-slip paint, the claimant’s slip would not have occurred.
Held: The appellant submitted that exceptionally the omission to use non-slip paint should be treated as having made a material contribution to the accident, and further that a material contribution to the risk of slipping should be sufficient where as a matter of policy the court might exceptionally find causation proved even though, due to the limits of current knowledge, the evidence did not permit a factual inference that the increase in risk materially contributed to the damage: ‘The authorities to which Mr Burton drew attention establish that the ‘but for’ test, applied in its full rigour, should no longer be treated as a single, invariable test applicable to causation issues, in whatever circumstances they may arise. The question in the present appeal is whether Fairchild and the series of decisions developing the law of which it represented the culmination (subject of course to subsequent developments) have any application here. In my judgment, in agreement with the judge, they do not. On any view, it would be absurd to describe this unfortunate accident as exceptional. Accidents like this happen all too frequently, and even though negligence by an identified tortfeasor is established, the question still remains whether the negligence caused the claimant’s injuries. A successful claim for damages for personal injuries consequent on negligence or breach of duty requires the court to be satisfied that the injuries were indeed consequent on the defendant’s negligence. . . the distinction sought to be drawn . . between material contribution to damage and material contribution to the risk of damage has no application to cases where the claimant’s injuries arose from a single incident.’

Judges:

Sir Anthony May VP, Hallett, Richards LJJ

Citations:

[2006] EWCA Civ 15, [2006] PIQR, [2006] NPC 8

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Clough v First Choice Holidays and Flights Ltd QBD 2005
‘Mr Saggerson [then appearing for the Defendant] made the point . . that there is always a risk of slipping around a swimming pool. That, I am sure, is the common experience of everyone who uses a swimming pool, whether at home or abroad. In those . .

Cited by:

Cited – Environment Agency v Ellis CA 17-Oct-2008
The claimant was injured working for the appellants. The appellants now appealed the finding that they were responsible saying that other factors contributed to the injury, and in particular that he had fallen at home. The claimant said that that . .
Cited – Sanderson v Hull CA 5-Nov-2008
Insufficient proof of cause of infection
The claimant worked as a turkey plucker. She caught an infection (campylobacter enteritis) at work, and the employer now appealed against a finding of liability. The employer said that the only necessary protection was regular washing of hands. The . .
Cited – Wootton v J Docter Ltd and Another CA 19-Dec-2008
The claimant sought damages saying that the contraceptive pill dispensed by the defendant was not the one prescribed by her doctor, and that she had become pregnant and suffered the losses claimed namely care, expenses and loss of earnings flowing . .
Cited – Wilson v Haden (T/A Clyne Farm Centre) QBD 15-Feb-2013
The claimant sought damages after being injured on an adventure sports weekend hosted by the defendant.
Held: The defendants had failed to follow their own safety procedures associated with this particular feature. The landing area cushioning . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.238130

Skov AEG v Bilka Lavprisvarehus A/S: ECJ 10 Jan 2006

ECJ Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products – Liability of the supplier of a defective product.
The class of persons liable against whom an injured person is entitled to bring an action under the system of liability laid down by the Directive is defined in articles 1 and 3 of the Directive.

Citations:

[2006] EUECJ C-402/03, [2006] ECR I-00199

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Directive 85/374/EEC

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Declan O’Byrne v Sanofi Pasteur MSD Ltd, formerly Aventis Pasteur MSD Ltd, Sanofi Pasteur SA ECJ 9-Feb-2006
ECJ Directive 85/374/EEC – Liability for defective products – Definition of -putting into circulation- of the product – Supply by the producer to a wholly owned subsidiary. . .
Cited – OB v Aventis Pasteur SA HL 11-Jun-2008
The claimant had been vaccinated with a HIB vaccine. He was severely injured and it was said that the vaccine was the cause, and a claim made under the 1987 Act. Originally the claim was made against a UK company, but it should have been against . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237652

Baird v Thurrock Borough Council: CA 7 Nov 2005

The defendant council appealed a finding of negligence after a dustbinman had been injured when he was struck by a wheelie bin. He had said that a malfunction in the mechanism loading the wheelie bin caused him to be hit by one.
Held: The judge had failed to recount properly his findings on the evidence. Whilst judges were properly encouraged to keep their judgments brief, the parties had to be left in a position to assess how the decision had been reached. A judge does not have to deal with each and every point in issue, but must deal with the fundamental points. There had to be a re-trial.

Judges:

Ward LJ, Keene LJ, Gage LJ

Citations:

Times 15-Nov-2005, [2005] EWCA Civ 1499

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – English v Emery Reimbold and Strick Ltd; etc, (Practice Note) CA 30-Apr-2002
Judge’s Reasons Must Show How Reached
In each case appeals were made, following Flannery, complaining of a lack of reasons given by the judge for his decision.
Held: Human Rights jurisprudence required judges to put parties into a position where they could understand how the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Bates v Malyon QBD 10-Oct-2008
The defendant had driven into the rear of the claimant’s car. The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim by the judge who said he had not discharged the burden of proof of negligence.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge had reached a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.237491

Sowerby v Charlton: CA 21 Dec 2005

Before proceedings, in without prejudice discussions, the defendant made certain admissions. They were withdrawn before proceedings commenced. The claimant said that they could not be withdrawn.
Held: Until proceedings began the Civil Procedure Rules had nothing on which to bite. Accordingly the defendant remained free to withdraw a concession before proceedings were issued.

Judges:

Lord Justice May Lord Justice Brooke Sir Anthony Clarke MR

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1610, Times 05-Jan-2006, [2006] 1 WLR 586

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Braybrook v The Basildon and Thurrock University NHS Trust 7-Oct-2004
Sumner J gave guidance on the withdrawal of an admission under the CPR: ‘From the cases and the CPR I draw the following principals:
1. In exercising its discretion, the court will consider all the circumstances of the case and seek to give . .

Cited by:

Cited – Woodland v Stopford and Others CA 16-Mar-2011
The claimant appealed against a decision allowing a defendant to withdraw an admission of liability. As a child she had got into difficulties during a class swimming lesson, and had ceased to breathe leaving her with catastrophic hypoxic brain . .
Cited – Berg v Blackburn Rovers Football Club and Athletic Plc ChD 29-Apr-2013
The claimant sought damages after termination of his contract of employment as manager of the defendant football club. The Club now sought leave to withdraw an admission of liability as to payment in respect of a minimum period of notice.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236615

Sam v Atkins: CA 9 Nov 2005

May LJ said: ‘Caparo and Murphy v Brentford were both cases concerning economic loss, not physical damage, but the principle is the same for each. The question is whether the relationship between the claimant and the defendant is such that it imposes on the latter a duty to take care to avoid or prevent the loss which has in fact been sustained. That question subsumes the question whether the acts or omissions of the defendant cause the damage relied on. If they do not there is no negligence’

Judges:

May LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1452

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Macleod (By His Deputy and Litigation Friend, Macleod) v Commissioner of Police of The Metropolis QBD 3-Apr-2014
The claimant sought damages after being severely injured when knocked from his cycle by police officers in a car attending an emergency, and driving over the speed limit.
Held: The claim succeeded, and there had been no contributory negligence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Road Traffic, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236372

Merseyside Fire and Civil Defence Authority v Bassie: CA 1 Nov 2005

The defendant appealed the award of andpound;100,0000 damages for injury to the plaintiff’s knee in the course of his employment as a fireman. He had been training in the gym, and fell while running. The judge found that he had slipped on a surface of dust on the floor in breach of the Regulations.
Held: Simple mopping woud have been adequate to remove a known risk. The judgment could not be faulted.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1474

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992 5(1) 12(3)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.236367

Kearsley v Klarfeld: CA 6 Dec 2005

The defendants had suggested three doctors to examine the claimant. The claimants suggested a Dr P to prepare a report, but when asked for his CV instructed him anyway. The defendant’s unqualified motor examiner said the accident had occurred at less than a speed sufficient to cause injury. The doctor described whiplash. The defendants wished to argue fraud, and sought directions accordingly.
Held: The court gave guidance on the admission of additional expert evidence, and as to the relationship of pleading to evidence. Brooke LJ said: ‘To obviate such difficulties in future, and to ensure that factual issues in medical cases are economically and efficiently tried, the following procedure should be adopted. First, a party who seeks to contradict a factually pleaded case on the basis of medical records or reports should indicate that intention in advance, either by amendment of his pleadings or by informal notice. Then, the opposite party must indicate the extent to which they take objection to the accuracy of the records. When the area of dispute is identified, a decision will have to be taken as to whether the records need to be formally proved.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1510, [2006] 2 All ER 303

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Casey v Cartwright CA 5-Oct-2006
There had been a low impact traffic accident, with conflicting evidence as to the damages suffered and capable of beingcaused by such an accident. The court considered the correct practice for the court in allowing additional expert evidence in . .
Cited – Charnock and Others v Rowan and Others CA 20-Jan-2012
14 passengers in a bus hit from behind at a slow speed had all claimed whiplash injury. The expert had said that the accepted speed required to produce such an injury was a change of 3mph, which would require an impact at 30mph, whereas the evidence . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235724

Rowbottom v Royal Masonic Hospital: CA 12 Feb 2002

The claimant sought damages for the negligent failure to administer antibiotics. Earlier proceedings had been discontinued, and the hospital resisted subsequent proceedings, claiming them to be time-barred. The claimant asserted that he knew of the negligence not when advised by counsel, but rather at a later date when he received a medical report.
Held: Time runs from when the claimant knows that the personal injury can be attributed to the defendant whom he wishes to sue. Counsel’s opinion did not suggest finally that the cause of the injury was the failure to provide antibiotics, since it was not then known whether they had been administered. (By a majority) The case should proceed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Mantell, And, Mr. Justice Wall

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 87

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dobbie v Medway Health Authority CA 11-May-1994
The plaintiff had a lump on her breast. The surgeon, without first subjecting the lump to a microscopic examination in order to determine whether it was cancerous or benign, removed the breast. This was in 1973. The lump was subsequently found to be . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.167618

Haddow v Glasgow City Council: SCS 23 Nov 2005

Outer House – The pursuer sought damages from her employers, saying that she had slipped on a wet floor, and had not been provided with non-slip shoes.

Judges:

Lord MacPhail

Citations:

[2005] ScotCS CSOH – 157

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992 4 10

Scotland, Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.235245

Jakto Transport Ltd. v Derek Hall: CA 9 Nov 2005

The claimant alleged injury from use of a torque wrench, and succeeded. The employer appealed.
Held: Though the appeal failed, the judge should have been careful not to consider the expert’s evidence separately, and not first making preliminary findings of fact.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 1327, Times 28-Nov-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Mibanga v Secretary of State for the Home Department CA 17-Mar-2005
The court considered the proper approach to expert evidence when viewed alongside other evidence: Wilson J said ‘It seems to me to be axiomatic that a fact-finder must not reach his or her conclusion before surveying all the evidence relevant . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.234690

AM v Reverend Joseph Hendron and others: OHCS 13 Sep 2005

Serious abuse was said to have been inflicted by monks of the De La Salle order on those in their charge at an approved school in Scotland. The former pupil claimant contended that the SED owed him a non-delegable duty which entitled him to financial redress for his suffering.
Held: The case could not be dismissed for irrelevancy.
Lady Paton said: ‘In the present case, I have ultimately concluded that the reasoning of the House of Lords in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] 1 AC 215, the developing jurisprudence relating to the concept of a non-delegable duty of care in certain contexts, and underlying policy reasons, make it necessary for the courts to recognise the existence of a common law non-delegable duty of care on the part of a government body such as that represented by the eighteenth defender in respect of children allocated by the government to government-created residential schools such as St. Ninian’s. Such a non-delegable duty of care may be particularly relevant where it is not possible to establish more traditional liability such as direct or vicarious liability. In the context of a non-delegable duty of care, liability may arise even where there has been no fault on the part of the government body.
In reaching that conclusion, I have not overlooked the concerns expressed by Gleeson C.J., Callinan J., and Gummow and Hayne J.J. in Lepore, when they point out that an unrestricted development of the concept of a non-delegable duty of care could result in an unacceptable extension of liability. I also accept the force of Lord Bridge’s observations in D and F Estates Ltd v Church Commissioners for England [1989] 1 A.C. 177, at pages 210D-E. However it seems to me that, in the context of abuse by staff of inmates of residential establishments, those concerns and observations are met and answered by the guidelines laid down by the House of Lords in Lister v Hesley Hall Ltd [2002] A.C.215′ and
‘the underlying policy reasons referred to in paragraph [113] above include a perception that it is unacceptable for a government body responsible for a system of residential schools to have no liability for abuse inflicted on pupils by staff whose task it is to care for, supervise, or instruct those pupils, on the technical ground that certain functions (such as entering into contracts of employment with members of staff) have been delegated to others such as unpaid members of the community performing what might be seen as civic duties. If the obvious link of employer-employee is not clearly available in relation to the government body, then the pupil is left to attempt to recover damages in respect of injuries suffered at the hands of those placed in authority over him, from others fulfilling certain functions within the system. There is no reason in principle or precedent why a government body should in such circumstances be free of liability for abuse in a situation such as is envisaged in Lister – that is, where there is a close connection between the work which the staff were engaged to perform and the type of abuse inflicted. In such circumstances, the concept of a non-delegable duty of care at common law is in my view appropriate, and would be fair, just and reasonable to impose. The medical context offers a useful parallel, in particular the dicta of Lord Denning in Cassidy v Ministry of Health [1951] 2 K.B. 343; the observations of Lord Phillips M.R. at paragraph 63 of A v Ministry of Defence [2004] EWCA Civ 641; and the views of Mason J. in Introvigne, referred to in paragraphs [23] and [25] of New South Wales v Lepore.’

Judges:

Lady Paton

Citations:

[2005] ScotCS CSOH – 121

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Cited by:

Cited – Woodland v The Swimming Teachers’ Association and Others QBD 17-Oct-2011
The court was asked as to the vicarious or other liability of a school where a pupil suffered injury at a swimming lesson with a non-employee during school time, and in particular whether it had a non-delegable duty to ensure the welfare of children . .
See Also – McE v Hendron and de La Salle Brothers SCS 11-Apr-2007
(Opinion of Lord Osborne) The claimant sought damages saying that he had suffered abuse while a pupil at the approved school managed by the respondents. The claim was a test case as there were pending some 150 additional cases where abuse was . .
Cited – Woodland v Essex County Council CA 9-Mar-2012
The claimant had been injured in a swimming pool during a lesson. The lesson was conducted by outside independent contractors. The claimant appealed against a finding that his argument that they had a non-delegable duty of care was bound to fail. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury, Education, Negligence

Updated: 04 July 2022; Ref: scu.230233

Clough v First Choice Holidays and Flights Ltd: QBD 2005

‘Mr Saggerson [then appearing for the Defendant] made the point . . that there is always a risk of slipping around a swimming pool. That, I am sure, is the common experience of everyone who uses a swimming pool, whether at home or abroad. In those circumstances, I find it difficult to draw much from accounts of incidents of slipping such as those to which these witnesses referred’.

Judges:

DW Foskett QC

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 80 (QB)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Healy v Cosmosair Plc and others QBD 28-Jul-2005
The claimant sought damages after being injured diving into a swimming pool in Portugal when on a holiday organised by the defendants. He said that the surrounds of the pool were not provided with appropriate non-slip surfaces. The defendant said . .
Appeal from – Clough v First Choice Holidays and Flights Ltd CA 25-Jan-2006
The appellant broke his neck slipping from a wall in a swimming pool in Lanzarote. The wall was not coated with fully non-slip paint. At first instance the failure to use such paint was held negligent for the purpose of the contract between them and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.229775

Pratt v the Scottish Ministers: OHCS 4 May 2005

Judges:

Lord Brodie

Citations:

[2005] ScotCS CSOH – 59

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Citing:

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

Scotland, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.229460

Hutchinson v Metropolitan Police Commissioner and Another: QBD 27 Jul 2005

The claimant sought damages for assault by a probationary constable. The constable had been called to a drunken party for Sainsbury’s employees.
Held: The claimant had been assaulted. Miss Morgan had introduced herself as a police officer, had threatened the claimant with arrest and had then attempted to carry out the threat or to use excessive force. She was acting in the course of her duties even though off duty. The Commissioner asked the judge to revise his draft judgment challenging the finding that the first defendant had been acting in the course of her police duties. However: ‘the right to indemnity arises because Miss Morgan has incurred costs as a result of carrying out the functions assigned to her by the Commissioner’.

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1660 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Police Act 1996 88(1), Police Reform Act 2002 102

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Robinson v Fernsby, Scott-Kilvert CA 19-Dec-2003
The judge had drafted his judgment and sent the drafts to the parties for comment. He then received additional written representations from one party, from which he realised that he had made an error, and issued a corrected judgment which a . .
Distinguished – Makanjuola v Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis 1990
A plain clothed off duty police officer gained entry to premises by production of his warrant card. He enquired as to the immigration status of the two residents. He told them they were in breach of the immigration regulations, and demanded sexual . .
Cited – Gravgaard v Aldridge and Brownlee (A Firm) CA 9-Dec-2004
After the court had sent its draft judgment to the parties, counsel on each side had written to the court making fresh submissions.
Held: Contentious matters should only be allowed to be re-opened in very limited circumstances once a draft . .
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 – Weir v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police CA 29-Jan-2003
An off duty police officer had borrowed a marked police van without permission to help his girlfriend move house. The claimant appeared to be rummaging through his girlfriend’s belongings. The claimant refused to obey officer who was employed by the . .
Cited – Bernard v The Attorney General of Jamaica PC 7-Oct-2004
PC (Jamaica) The claimant had been queuing for some time to make an overseas phone call at the Post Office. Eventually his turn came, he picked up the phone and dialled. Suddenly a man intervened, announced . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Vicarious Liability, Police

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.229283

Griffin and others v Clwyd Health Authority and others: CA 14 May 2001

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 818

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 33

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Coad v Cornwall and Isles of Scilly Health Authority CA 17-Jul-1996
A nurse suffered a back injury in 1983 in the course of her employment. She left the employment of the health authority in either 1990 or 1991. The judge had accepted her evidence that she did not know that she had a right of action against her . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Limitation

Updated: 03 July 2022; Ref: scu.201050

AB and Others v Ministry of Defence: QBD 5 Jun 2009

Former members of the armed forces and others claimed damages for personal injuries, claiming that they had been obliged to expose themselves to the effects of atomic bomb explosions in the 1950s. The defendant argued that the claims were now out of time.
Held: New scientific evidence had become available to support the claim, and to restart the limitation period.

Judges:

Foskett J

Citations:

[2009] EWHC 1225 (QB), Times 09-Jun-2009

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Loveday v Renton and Wellcome Foundation Ltd 1990
Stuart-Smith LJ said that there is no ‘generally accepted standard of scientific proof.’ The court rejected epidemiological evidence presented to it. . .
Cited – A and Others v The United Kingdom ECHR 19-Feb-2009
(Grand Chamber) The applicants had been subjected to severe restrictions. They were foreign nationals suspected of terrorist involvement, but could not be deported for fear of being tortured. The UK had derogated from the Convention to put the . .
Cited – Hughes and others (By Their Litigation Friend) v Richards (Trading As Colin Richards and Co ) CA 9-Mar-2004
Parents and their children claimed against a tax adviser for negligence in relation to setting up an offshore trust. The defendant applied to strike out the children’s claim on the basis that the defendant owed them no duty of care and only the . .
Cited – Loveday v Renton and Wellcome Foundation Ltd 1990
Stuart-Smith LJ said that there is no ‘generally accepted standard of scientific proof.’ The court rejected epidemiological evidence presented to it. . .
Cited – Nash v Eli Lilly and Co QBD 1991
The court discussed the relevance of knowledge obtainable by the plaintiff’s solicitor for limitation purposes.
Held: Hidden J said ‘My conclusion is therefore that there is no binding authority on whether facts ascertainable by a plaintiff . .

Cited by:

See Also – AB and Others v Ministry Of Defence QBD 19-Jun-2009
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Armed Forces, Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.346753

Sayers v Cambridgeshire County Council: QBD 31 Jul 2006

Social worker’s claim for work related stress.

Citations:

[2006] EWHC 2029 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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

Personal Injury

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.279536

A v The Archbishop of Birmingham: QBD 30 Jun 2005

Assessment of damages following child abuse by Catholic priest.
Held: General damages of andpound;50,000 were in line with Coxon and were approved. A had not been shown to be, and is not, incapable of managing his affairs. The court differed from the conclusion of the Court of Protection. Damages should be awarded on the basis that a special needs trust was established for the claimant. He could only recover for the cost of personal care by his family were this went significantly beyond the normal incidents of care within a family.

Judges:

Christopher Clarke J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1361 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Coxon v Flintshire County Council CA 13-Feb-2001
The guidelines on damages for psychiatric damage did not apply to the damages claims of those who had been subjected to sexual abuse whilst children in local authority care homes. The injury in these cases was of a different character, and the . .
Cited – Firth v George Ackroyd Junior Ltd 2000
. .
Cited – Ryan v Liverpool Health Authority 2001
. .
Cited – Masterman-Lister v Brutton and Co, Jewell and Home Counties Dairies (No 1) CA 19-Dec-2002
Capacity for Litigation
The claimant appealed against dismissal of his claims. He had earlier settled a claim for damages, but now sought to re-open it, and to claim in negligence against his former solicitors, saying that he had not had sufficient mental capacity at the . .
Cited – Bell v Todd 2001
. .
Cited – Russell Mitchell v Ryan Alasia 2005
The court considered whether the claimant, whom the Court of Protection had decided was a patient and in respect of whom a Receiver had been appointed, was and would continue to be one. The court concluded that, in the context of pursuing his claim . .
Cited – Giambrone and others v Sunworld Holidays Ltd CA 18-Feb-2004
Many holidaymakers had suffered gastro-enteritis and sued for compensation. They had sought a sum to reflect the value of gratuitous care.
Held: Save in more serious cases, awards for children suffering gastro-enteritis and cared for by their . .

Cited by:

Cited – The Catholic Child Welfare Society and Others v Various Claimants and The Institute of The Brothers of The Christian Schools and Others SC 21-Nov-2012
Law of vicarious liability is on the move
Former children at the children’s homes had sought damages for sexual and physical abuse. The court heard arguments as to the vicarious liability of the Society for abuse caused by a parish priest visiting the school. The Court of Appeal had found . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.228280

Cressey v E Timm and Son Ltd and E Timm and Son Holding Ltd: CA 24 Jun 2005

The claimant sought to counter a defence that his claim was out of time, saying that he had been misinformed as to the name of his employer.
Held: A person could not sue simply ‘his employer’. He must find a name, particularly as against a limited company, to begin his action. The claimant had been given the wrong name, an should be allowed to extend the tlimitation period.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 763, Times 25-Jul-2005

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 11(4) 14(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Farraj and Another v King’s Healthcare NHS Trust and Another QBD 26-May-2006
The claimants sought damages after the birth of their child with a severe hereditary disease which they said the defendant hospital had failed to diagnose after testing for that disease. The hospital sought a contribution from the company CSL who . .
Cited – Edwards v Golding and others CA 3-Apr-2007
The claimant appealed against an order that his claim in defamation had failed for limitation, the judge having held that time ran from publication even though the claimant did not know the identity of the author.
Held: The appeal was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.227924

McDonnell v Holwerda: QBD 27 May 2005

The claimant sought damages alleging that the defendant doctor had failed to diagnose his child meningitis.
Held: The examination conducted by the doctor had been inadequate in the circumstances, and her approach inflexible: ‘although the defendant’s assessment on the first occasion did not fall below the standard required of her, it was marked by a measure of inattention to the vomiting and a significant measure of certainty. In my judgment, her overall assessment on the second occasion was reached in haste.’

Judges:

Newman J

Citations:

[2005] EWHC 1081 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.226998

Lewis v Avidan Ltd (T/A High Meadow Nursing Home): CA 13 Apr 2005

A nurse claimed damages after slipping on a patch of water in the nursing home where she worked. The defendant argued that the pipe which had broken was not equipment so as to make it liable.
Held: The nurse’s appeal failed. The mere fact of an entirely unexpected and unpredictable flood does not mean that a floor is not maintained in an efficient state: ‘the pipe which burst, although it may have been equipment, was not equipment a fault in which was liable to result in a failure to comply with any of the regulations, in particular regulation 5(1). This in turn means that the respondents in the present case were not, on the facts, in breach of regulation 5(1).’

Judges:

May LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 670

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, European Framework Directive (Council Directive 89/391/EEC) of 12 June 1989

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Millar v Galashiels Gas Co Ltd; Galashiels Gas Company Ltd v O’Donnell HL 20-Jan-1949
A hoist mechanism failed, the employee was injured, and he sought damages from his employer under the Act.
Held: The section imposes an absolute obligation to maintain work equipment in an efficient state or in efficient working order. The . .
Cited – Latimer v AEC Limited HL 25-Jun-1953
The Appellant had recovered damages for injuries which he alleged had been the result of a failure on the part of the Respondents in their statutory duty to maintain one of the gangways in their works in an efficient state. He slipped on a factory . .
Cited – James Edward Beck v United Closures and Plastics Plc SCS 22-Jun-2001
Two heavy doors in which the pursuer trapped his hand were not within the definition of workplace, which contemplated open spaces, but did constitute work equipment in terms of the 1998 Regulations. . .
Cited – Stark v Post Office CA 2-Mar-2000
A component in a postman’s bicycle gave way even though the machine had been sensibly maintained and checked. He sought damages for his injuries.
Held: The duty imposed by the regulations was absolute, and an employee postal worker who was . .

Cited by:

Cited – Munro v Aberdeen City Council SCS 17-Sep-2009
Safety Duty on Employer was not Absolute
The pursuer was injured slipping on ice in her defender employer’s car park. Liability depended on the interpretation of regulation 5, the claimant saying that it imposed an absolute requirement to maintain the workplace in efficient working order . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.226977

Charles v Cardiff County Council: CA 18 Nov 2002

The claimant was assaulted whilst at work at a residential care home. She answered the door to visitors who were drunk. She appealed a refusal of her claim against her employers.
Held: The judge had sufficient evidence before him to establish that the absence of a chain on the door was not a breach of statutory duty. The appeal failed.

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1753

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 01 July 2022; Ref: scu.217800

Beesley v New Century Group Ltd: QBD 16 Dec 2008

The court considered the quantification of damages after a successful claim by the estate of a man who had died from mesothelioma.

Judges:

Hamblen J

Citations:

[2008] EWHC 3033 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934, Fatal Accidents Act 1976

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.278793

Wright v Sullivan: CA 27 May 2005

The claimant had appointed a clinical case manager. She appealed an order requiring the case manager to report also to the court.
Held: The case manager’s duties were purely to the claimant, and an order requiring that manager to report also to any other party would be inimical to his task. Nevertheless any communication between the case manager and the claimant’s experts would not be protected by litigation privilege.

Judges:

Brooke LJ, Dyson LJ, Lloyd LJ

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 656, Times 24-Jun-2005

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Waugh v British Railways Board HL 12-Jul-1979
No Litigation Privilege without Dominant Purpose
An internal report had been prepared by two of the Board’s officers two days after a collision involving the death of a locomotive driver, whose widow brought the action and now sought its production.
Held: The court considered litigation . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.225328

Harding v The Pub Estate Company Ltd: CA 6 May 2005

Damages for stress at work – public house manager.

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 553

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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

Personal Injury

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224792

Davies v Stockwell (T/A R and R Stockwell Builiding Contractors): CA 15 Apr 2005

The defendant sought leave to appeal against a finding of laibility after the claimant was injured tripping over a paving stone left by the defendant demolishing a property. Orange bunting strung between posts had been left around the site overnight, but had been removed by vandals.
Held: Leave was granted, but the court encouraged the defendant to settle the matter. Smith v Littlewood had not been wrongly applied. ‘the defendant left property for which he is responsible in a situation in which vandals which he knows or should know would be likely to use that property in a way that will create a danger. ‘

Citations:

[2005] EWCA Civ 444

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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

Personal Injury

Updated: 30 June 2022; Ref: scu.224780

Mccook v Lobo and others: CA 19 Nov 2002

The defendant was the occupier of premises. He did not direct how the work should be done and was not present at the time the work was being performed.
Held: He had not been in control of the relevant work. Judge LJ referred to Regulation 4(2) of the 1996 Regulations and said: ‘The requisite level of control before the duty does arise, however, is linked to the way in which construction work is carried out and it is confined to construction work within the individual’s control. For this purpose the obvious person who controls the way in which construction work on site is carried out is an employer. The employer owes express duties under regulation 4(1). That, therefore, identifies the starting point. But someone who is not an employer may also be bound by the statutory obligation under regulation 4(2). Whether the appropriate level of control over the work is or should be exercised by an individual other than an employer so as to create the duty to comply with the obligations under regulation 4(2) is, in my judgment, a question of fact. It is not answered affirmatively by demonstrating that an individual has control over the site in a general sense as an occupier, or that as the occupier of the site he was entitled to ask or require a contractor to remove obvious hazards from the site. The required control is related to control over the work of construction’
Hale LJ underlined that the issue of control was an issue of fact, saying: ‘Regulation 4(2) of the 1996 Regulations to my mind depends entirely on the question of factual control.’

Judges:

Judge LJ, Hale LJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1760, [2003] ICR 89

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Construction (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1996

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Ferguson v Welsh HL 29-Oct-1987
The plaintiff sought damages for personal injury. A council had engaged a competent contractor to carry out demolition works. Unknown to the council, the contractor sub-contracted the works to two brothers who worked in a highly dangerous manner. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gray v Fire Alarm Fabrication Services Ltd and others QBD 3-Mar-2006
The deceased, a maintenance engineer died after falling through a skylight at work. The court considered the respective liabilities of his employer and the landowner. . .
Cited – Gray v Fire Alarm Fabrication Services Ltd and others QBD 3-Mar-2006
The deceased, a maintenance engineer died after falling through a skylight at work. The court considered the respective liabilities of his employer and the landowner. . .
Cited – Kmiecic v Isaacs QBD 12-Mar-2010
The claimant sought damages after suffering injury when falling from a ladder working on the uninsured builder’s site. He sued the owners of the property, saying that by refusing to allow or pay for the work to be conducted in safer ways, she had . .
Cited – Barrett v Kirklees Metropolitan Council Admn 12-Mar-2010
The claimant challenged the policy of the defendant to pay support to special guardians appointed under the 2002 Act at two thirds only of the rate it paid in fostering allowance.
Held: The policy was a substantial and insufficiently justified . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Construction, Health and Safety

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.217850

Garrett v Camden London Borough Council: CA 16 Mar 2001

The court considered a claim for work related stress. The claimant asserted that he had been harassed, intimidated and systematically undermined: ‘Many, alas, suffer breakdowns and depressive illnesses and a significant proportion could doubtless ascribe some at least some of their problems to the strains and stresses of their work situation: be it simply overworking, the tension of difficult relationships, career prospect worries, fears or feelings of discrimination or harassment, to take some examples. Unless, however, there was a real risk of breakdown which the claimant’s employers ought reasonably to have foreseen and they ought properly to have averted there can be no liability.’ (Simon Brown LJ)

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 395, [2001] All ER (D) 202

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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

Cited by:

Cited – Hartman v South Essex Mental Health and Community Care NHS Trust etc CA 19-Jan-2005
The court considered the liability of employers for stress injury to several employees.
Held: Though the principles of awarding damages for stress related psychiatric injury are the same as those for physical injury, the issues have still . .
Cited – Banks v Ablex Ltd CA 24-Feb-2005
The claimant appealed denial of her claim for damages for psychological injury. She complained that her employer had failed to prevent her and other female employees being bullied by a co-worker, and they committed a breach of statutory duty in . .
Cited – D v Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd QBD 23-May-2006
The claimant sought damages for stress incurred at work. She had suffered post natal depression and received counselling through her work and recovered. She suffered a second bout of depression after the birth of another child, but again was thought . .
Cited – Helen Green v DB Group Services (UK) Ltd QBD 1-Aug-2006
The claimant sought damages from her former employers, asserting that workplace bullying and harassment had caused injury to her health. She had had a long term history of depression after being abused as a child, and the evidence was conflicting, . .
Cited – Clark v The Chief Constable of Essex Police QBD 18-Sep-2006
The officer had retired on ill health grounds, and now sought damages from his chief constable saying that the duties imposed on him had been excessive, and had caused his injury by negligence, and that he had been bullied by co-workers and had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Employment

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.222973

Newman v Folkes: CA 3 May 2002

The claimant suffered head injuries in a car accident. The defendant appealed the award of damages, on the basis that the claimant had made exaggerated loss of earnings claims, and should have received only reduced, ‘Manchester’ damages. The claimant had never paid tax or national insurance, but lived a lifestyle suggesting income.
Held: The judge had eventually found evidence to support part of the claim, and had made an award supported by that evidence. He had been awarded a sum for care. He was now violent and potentially aggressive. The judge’s award was not so wrong as to be capable of being set aside on appeal. The judge had correctly reduced the multiplier to allow for the uncertainties of the evidence.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Sedley And Mr Justice Sumner

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 591

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.170272

Annona Maria James v Stuart Fairley: CA 21 Feb 2002

The claimant appealed dismissal of her claim for damages for serious personal injury suffered by her as a child. She had walked out in front of a car. In poor visibility, and with dark clothing, the defendant may not have had opportunity to avoid her.
Held: There was no strong evidence as to her behaviour. She was found not to have stopped at the kerb. It was a counsel of perfection, to say the defendant ought to have seen and reacted at the very split second that she stepped off the kerb. Even if he ought to have seen her, he would not have had opportunity to stop. There was no basis for a finding of negligence.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward, And, Lord Justice Longmore

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 162

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Negligence, Road Traffic

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.167642

Konig and Motor Insurers Bureau v Hay: CA 24 Jan 2002

The claimant had been awarded substantial damages for injuries received in a road traffic accident. He had been able to work in a reduced capacity, but claimed he would need assistance. The appeal alleged that the judge had wrongly allowed for the fact that the claimant would be living in the US, that the claim for support was unsustained on the evidence, and the wrong multiplier had been used, not allowing for a medium term rehabilitations. The first appeal ground was not made out from the judgment. The assessment that the claimant would need longer term care was reasoned and based upon the evidence. Though these matters remain one of impression, the judge’s assessment of the multiplier needed adjustment, from 22 to 17.

Judges:

Lord Justice Henry, Lord Justice Dyson, And, Mr. Justice Harrison

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 19

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Goldfinch v Scannell 1993
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.167470

Mirvahedy v Henley and Henley: CA 21 Nov 2001

Horses with no abnormal characteristics were panicked, ran out and collided with a car. The car driver sought damages.
Held: The question was not whether the animals betrayed abnormal characteristics of which the owners should have been aware, but rather, given their lack of abnormality, whether the reaction was one which was characteristic of what might be expected of a normal member of that species in those circumstances. If it was the latter, then the owner was strictly liable.

Judges:

The President Of The Family Division, Lady Justice Hale, And, Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

Times 11-Dec-2001, Gazette 17-Jan-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1749, [2002] QB 769, [2002] 2 WLR 566, [2002] PIQR P19

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Animals Act 1971 2(2)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Approved – Cummings v Grainger CA 1977
An untrained Alsatian dog was turned loose in a scrap-yard to deter intruders. The dog seriously injured the plaintiff who had entered the yard.
Held: The requirements of section 2(2) were satisfied but the defendant was entitled to rely upon . .
Approved – Curtis v Betts CA 1990
The defendant owned a bull mastiff dog. It was known to react fiercely when protecting its territory. The plaintiff, a child, had known the dog since it was a puppy, and approached as the dog was about to be put into a car. The dog bit his face . .
Distinguished – Christopher John Gloster v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police CA 24-Mar-2000
The plaintiff was a police officer. While carrying out his duties he was bitten by a police dog, an Alsatian, which had been trained to be aggressive when working. The claim failed, largely on the ground that on the particular facts the damage was . .
Distinguished – Breeden v Lampard CA 21-Mar-1985
A riding accident occurred at a cubbing meet. The plaintiff’s leg was injured when the defendant’s horse kicked out. A claim was advanced under section 2. This horse, like any horse, was liable to kick out when approached too closely, or too . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Mirvahedy v Henley and another HL 20-Mar-2003
The defendants’ horses escaped from the field, and were involved in an accident with the claimant’s car.
Held: The defendants were liable under section 2(2). To bolt was a characteristic of horses which was normal ‘in the particular . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Animals, Personal Injury

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.166929

Steven Robert Evans v Pontypridd Roofing Limited: CA 9 Nov 2001

The claimant sought as part of his damages the cost of the care provided by family members. Counsel for the defendant raised issues about tax, national insurance and travel and other costs which a professional carer would have to bear, which led the court to reject any precise method of approach. The court should avoid a strait-jacket, such as might happen if it was said that the a proper recompense for services provided gratuitously by a family carer had to be assessed in a particular way or ways. Circumstances vary enormously. If a caring relative has given up employment to care for the claimant gratuitously, it might be appropriate to assess the proper recompense for the services provided by reference to the carer’s lost earnings. If the carer has not given up gainful employment the task remains to assess proper recompense for the services provided.

Judges:

Judge Prosser, May LJ

Citations:

[2001] EWCA Civ 1657, [2002] PIQR Q5

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons CA 19-Mar-2003
Both parties appealed against the lower court’s orders. The claimant, a child was injured by a car driven by the defendant, who had been found 25% responsible. The claimant had suffered head injuries, and subsequently epilepsy.
Held: The award . .
Cited – Giambrone and others v JMC Holidays Ltd (Formerly Sunworld Holidays Ltd) QBD 20-Dec-2002
. .
Cited – Giambrone and others v Sunworld Holidays Ltd CA 18-Feb-2004
Many holidaymakers had suffered gastro-enteritis and sued for compensation. They had sought a sum to reflect the value of gratuitous care.
Held: Save in more serious cases, awards for children suffering gastro-enteritis and cared for by their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 29 June 2022; Ref: scu.166823