Category: Personal Injury

Doughty v Turner Ltd: CA 1964

The cover on a cauldron of exceedingly hot molten sodium cyanide was accidentally knocked into the cauldron and the plaintiff was damaged by the resultant explosion.
Held: The plaintiff’s claim failed. The defendant employer owed a duty of care in respect only of a foreseeable risk, that of splashing of the liquid if the cover fell into it.

Judges:

ord Pearce, Harman, Diplock LJJ

Citations:

[1964] 1 All ER 98, [1964] 1 QB 518, [1963] EWCA Civ 3, [1964] 2 WLR 240, [1964] 1 All ER 98, [1964] QB 518

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Doubted – 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 – Willers v Joyce and Another (Re: Gubay (Deceased) No 2) SC 20-Jul-2016
The Court was asked whether and in what circumstances a lower court may follow a decision of the Privy Council which has reached a different conclusion from that of the House of Lords (or the Supreme Court or Court of Appeal) on an earlier occasion. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188831

McDonnell v Congregation of Christian Brothers Trustees (Formerly Irish Christian Brothers) and others: HL 4 Dec 2003

In 2000, the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse from before 1951. The issue was as to whether the limitation law which applied was that as at the date of the incidents, or that which applied as at the date when he would be deemed uner the modern law to have acquired knowledge of the possibility of claiming.
Held: Though the 1963 Act, consolidated in the 1980 Act, was framed to remedy the injustice of Cartledge, it did not extend the law to override an accrued statutory time bar to pre-1954 six-year claims: ‘an accrued right to plead a time bar, which is acquired after the lapse of the statutory period, is in every sense a right, even though it arises under an Act which is procedural. It is a right which is not to be taken away by conferring on the statute a retrospective operation, unless such a construction is unavoidable.’ The decision in Arnold was not so wrong as to allow the House to depart from it. The claim failed.

Judges:

Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Steyn Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Rodger of Earlsferry

Citations:

[2003] UKHL 63, Times 05-Dec-2003, [2004] 1 AC 1101

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1939 2(1) 22

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Cartledge v E Jopling and Sons Ltd HL 1963
The plaintiffs were steel dressers who, in the course of their employment, had inhaled quantities of noxious dust which had caused them to suffer from pneumoconiosis. They issued proceedings on 1 October 1956 but were unable to show any breach of . .
Cited – Knipe v British Railways Board CA 1972
The plaintiff was injured in 1948, but it later became more serious, and in 1970, having obtained leave under the 1963 Act, he issued proceedings. The defendants argued that his claim was statute-barred under section 2(1). The defendant appealed. . .
Cited – Arnold v Central Electricity Generating Board HL 22-Oct-1987
The plaintiff was widow and administratrix of the estate of her deceased husband. He had worked from April 1938 to April 1943 for a predecessor to the CEGB. He had been exposed to asbestos dust as a result of his employer’s negligence and breach of . .
Cited – Yew Bon Tew v Kenderaan Bas Mara PC 7-Oct-1982
(Malaysia) In 1972 the appellants were injured by the respondent’s bus. At that time the local limitation period was 12 months. In 1974 the limitation period became three years. The appellants issued a writ in 1975. To succeed they would have to sue . .
Applied – Fitzleet Estates Ltd v Cherry HL 9-Nov-1977
Income tax – Schedule D, Cases III and VI – Payments of interest and ground rent incurred when property was being developed – Whether capitalised or paid out of profits or gains brought into charge to tax – Income Tax Act 1952 (15 and 16 Geo. 6 and . .
Mentioned – Stubbings v Webb and Another HL 10-Feb-1993
Sexual Assault is not an Act of Negligence
In claims for damages for child abuse at a children’s home made out of the six year time limit time were effectively time barred, with no discretion for the court to extend that limit. The damage occurred at the time when the child left the home. A . .

Cited by:

Cited – Regina on the Application of G v Westminster City Council QBD 30-Jan-2004
The child sought review of the respondent’s decision not to provide education other than at one school. He had been suspended, but his father refused to allow him to return complaining of the effects of bullying.
Held: The condition of being . .
Cited – King v The Serious Fraud Office CACD 18-Mar-2008
Restraint and Disclosure orders had been made on without notice applications at the request of South Africa. The applicant appealed a refusal of their discharge.
Held: Such orders did not apply to the applicant’s assets in Scotland. The orders . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188434

John James William Booth v Simon White: CA 18 Nov 2003

The claimant sought damages after being injured in a car driven by the defendant. The defendant now appealed an award at 1005, saying that the plaintiff had known that he had been drinking. The defendant was known to be a heavy drinker, and he said that the plaintiff should have asked him first how much he had drunk.
Held: The appeal failed. ‘The law requires the passenger to make an assessment of the driver when deciding whether, in the interest of his own safety, he should have a lift. ‘ but ‘the law would take a wrong turning if we were to require an interrogation in this type of case, of the type . . suggested.’

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1708

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Froom v Butcher CA 21-Jul-1975
The court asked what reduction if any should be made to a plaintiff’s damages where injuries were caused not only by the defendant’s negligent driving but also by the failure of the plaintiff to wear a seat belt. It had been submitted that, since . .
Cited – Brignall v Kelly CA 17-May-1994
There had been an accident in which the driver had lost control of his car. A blood sample taken two-and-a-half hours later showed that his blood alcohol limit was slightly more than twice the permitted maximum for driving. A professor of forensic . .
Cited – Owens v Brimmell 1977
Both the driver and his passenger had drunk about eight to nine pints of beer, and on their way home the driver lost control of his car so that it collided with a lamppost. The passenger sued in negligence. The driver said the passenger was . .
Cited – Malone v Rowan 1984
The burden of proving contributory negligence rests on the defendant. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.188300

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. One of the brothers employed the plaintiff, Mr Ferguson, to help them, and Mr Ferguson was injured when part of the building collapsed.
Held: The council was not liable. Assuming section 2 applied, the council was not liable under 2(4) having engaged a contractor it had reasonable grounds for regarding as competent, and there was no evidence to support any inference that the council or its responsible officers knew or ought to have known that its contractor was likely to contravene the prohibition on sub-contracting. There was no difficulty in finding the plaintiff to be licensee of one person and at the same time a trespasser as against the defendant,
Lord Keith: ‘It may therefore be inferred that an occupier might, in certain circumstances, be liable for something done or omitted to be done on his premises by an independent contractor if he did not take reasonable steps to satisfy himself that the contractor was competent and that the work was being properly done. It would not ordinarily be reasonable to expect an occupier of premises having engaged a contractor whom he has reasonable grounds for regarding as competent, to supervise the contractor’s activities in order to ensure that he was discharging his duty to his employees to observe a safe system of work. In special circumstances, on the other hand, where the occupier knows or has reason to suspect that the contractor is using an unsafe system of work, it might well be reasonable for the occupier to take steps to see that the system was made safe.’ and ‘It is possible to envisage circumstances in which an occupier of premises engaging the services of an independent contractor to carry out work on his premises may, as a result of his state of knowledge and opportunities of supervision, render himself liable to an employee of the contractor who is injured as a result of the defective system of work adopted by the employer. But I incline to think that his liability in such case would be rather that of joint tortfeasor that of an occupier.’

Judges:

Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Brandon of Oakbrook, Lord Griffiths, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton, Lord Goff of Chieveley

Citations:

[1987] 1 WLR 1553, [1987] UKHL 14

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers Liability Act 1957 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ladd v Marshall CA 29-Nov-1954
Conditions for new evidence on appeal
At the trial, the wife of the appellant’s opponent said she had forgotten certain events. After the trial she began divorce proceedings, and informed the appellant that she now remembered. He sought either to appeal admitting fresh evidence, or for . .

Cited by:

Distinguished – Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club CA 7-Nov-2003
The claimant was very badly injured at a bonfire organised by the defendants. He had been asked to help with a part of the display, organised by sub-contractors, which exploded as he was filling it.
Held: The nature of the activity to be . .
Applied – 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 – 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 – EH Humphries (Norton) Ltd. Thistle Hotels Plc v Fire Alarm Fabrication Services Ltd CA 10-Nov-2006
The sub-contractor’s workman fell through a skylight and died. His employers having settled, obtained contribution orders from the main contractors and building owners who each now appealed.
Held: Whether main contractors were also liable to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187568

Thornley v Lang: CA 29 Oct 2003

The claimant had pursued the case under a collective conditional fee agreement, organised by her trade union. The defendant challenged an order for payment of the costs, arguing that under the indemnity principle, the claimant would be under no duty to pay costs, and that therefore there he was denied her claim by the indemnity principle.
Held: The claimant was under a duty to pay his legal costs, and therefore could recover his costs even against the indemnity principle. The agreement with the lawyers was a collective conditional fee agreement and therefore not covered by the main Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations.
Lord Phillips MR referred to cases where litigants are funded by third parties such as trade unions: ‘When defeated by such a litigant, unsuccessful parties have, on occasion, invoked the indemnity principle in an attempt to avoid paying costs. The argument advanced has been that the successful litigant is not liable for his costs and, therefore, has no right to recover them. The courts have had no truck with such arguments. They have defeated them by finding that, in the circumstances under consideration, the litigant comes under an independent obligation, albeit one that is unlikely to be enforced, to pay the fees of the solicitor who is acting for him’

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Tuckey, Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers MR

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1484, Times 31-Oct-2003, [2004] 1 Costs LR 91, [2004] 1 All ER 886, [2004] 1 WLR 378

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 58, Collective Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 (2000 No 2988), Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 (2000 No 692)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Radford and Another v Frade and Others QBD 8-Jul-2016
The court was asked as to the terms on which solicitors and Counsel were retained to act for the defendants. The appeals did not raise any issues concerning costs practice, and were by way of review of the Costs Judge’s rulings, and not by way of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.187281

Bonser v UK Coal Mining Ltd: CA 9 Jun 2003

The employer appealed a finding that it was responsible in negligence to a staff member for stress related injury at work. The claimant had worked in the coal industry for 20 years, but she had then been made redundant. The defendants took her on as their Technical Support and Training Manager. Her reference said that she ‘would not be particularly good in a highly stressful environment but she is good at dealing with IT users, training and communication.’ She had a pre-existing emotional vulnerability but this was not apparent to the defendants.
Held: Lord Phillips MR said: ‘An employer will be in breach of duty to an employee if the employer subjects the employee to severe pressure of work in circumstances where the employer knows, or ought reasonably to foresee, that this is likely to cause the employee to suffer some form of breakdown which results in psychiatric injury. Happily most employees are sufficiently robust to withstand the stress of a heavy workload. Thus it is normally necessary to demonstrate, before breach of duty can be established, that the employer had particular reason to apprehend the danger that such injury would be caused to the individual employee.’ The defendants did not have reason to apprehend the danger and accordingly were not liable when she broke down.

Judges:

Lord Phillips MR

Citations:

Times 30-Jun-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1296, [2004] IRLR 164

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Sutherland v Hatton; Barber v Somerset County Council and similar CA 5-Feb-2002
Defendant employers appealed findings of liability for personal injuries consisting of an employee’s psychiatric illness caused by stress at work.
Held: Employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees. There are . .

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

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.186535

Holtby v Brigham and Cowan (Hull) Ltd: CA 6 Apr 2000

A claimant who sought damages for injuries suffered by the ingestion of asbestos whilst working for one employer, but had also worked for other periods for other employers where similar activities had been involved, had the onus in the claim to prove causation. It might be impossible to apportion the damage exactly, but he must demonstrate a substantial contribution from the defendant. Having been found responsible in this way, the employer would be responsible only to the extent of his contribution to the asbestosis. Each tortfeasor should be responsible only for the proportion which its exposure contributed to the damage.

Judges:

Lord Justice Stuart-Smith Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Clarke

Citations:

Times 12-Apr-2000, Gazette 11-May-2000, [2000] EWCA Civ 111, [2000] 3 All ER 421

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Thompson v Smiths Shiprepairers (North Shields) Ltd QBD 1984
The test to be applied in determining the time at which an employer’s failure to provide protection constituted actionable negligence was what would have been done at any particular time by a reasonable and prudent employer who was properly but not . .

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 – Horsley v Cascade Insulation Services Ltd and Others QBD 18-Nov-2009
The claimant sought damages after contracting asbestosis through employment exposure with the defendants. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety, Damages

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185908

Lim Poh Choo v Camden and Islington Area Health Authority: HL 21 Jun 1979

The plaintiff was catastrophically injured. Her life expectation was not affected, but she would never be able to work at her expected profession as a doctor, and was entitled to recover for loss of earnings. The defendant said that there was in effect a double claim.
Held: In order to avoid double recovery there had to be two deductions; first the expenses of earning the income which had been lost and ‘secondly, the plaintiff’s living expenses. This is necessarily a hypothetical figure in the case of a ‘lost years’ claim, since the plaintiff does not survive to earn the money; and since there is no cost of care claim (the plaintiff being assumed to be dead), it falls to be deducted from the loss of earnings award’. An award is conventional in the sense that there is no pecuniary guideline which can point the way to a correct assessment.

Judges:

Scarman L

Citations:

[1980] AC 174, [1979] UKHL 1

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Personal Injuries) Act 1948 2(4)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dews v National Coal Board HL 1988
The plaintiff miner sought damages for an injury suffered at work.
Held: An employee who had been injured at work could not recover unpaid pension contributions, which had no effect on his pension entitlement, as part of his loss of pay while . .

Cited by:

Cited – Geoffrey Chatwin v Janice Lowther CA 21-May-2003
The case concerned the meaning of the phrase ‘compensation for earnings lost’ as it applied to self employed persons.
Held: The fact that a person’s accounts described fees as turnover, did not prevent them being still earnings within the Act. . .
Cited – Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant was disabled, and sought sterilisation because she feared the additional difficulties she would face as a mother. The sterilisation failed. She sought damages.
Held: The House having considered the issue in MacFarlane only . .
Cited – Independent Assessor v O’Brien, Hickey, Hickey CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimants had been imprisoned for many years before their convictions were quashed. They claimed compensation under the Act. The assessor said that there should be deducted from the award the living expenses they would have incurred if they had . .
Cited – Independent Assessor v O’Brien, Hickey, Hickey CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimants had been imprisoned for many years before their convictions were quashed. They claimed compensation under the Act. The assessor said that there should be deducted from the award the living expenses they would have incurred if they had . .
Cited – O’Brien and others v Independent Assessor HL 14-Mar-2007
The claimants had been wrongly imprisoned for a murder they did not commit. The assessor had deducted from their compensation a sum to represent the living costs they would have incurred if living freely. They also appealed differences from a . .
Cited – O’Brien and others v Independent Assessor HL 14-Mar-2007
The claimants had been wrongly imprisoned for a murder they did not commit. The assessor had deducted from their compensation a sum to represent the living costs they would have incurred if living freely. They also appealed differences from a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 08 June 2022; Ref: scu.185767

Salter v UB Frozen Chilled Foods: OHCS 25 Jul 2003

The pursuer was involved in an accident at work, where his co-worker died. He suffered only psychiatric injury.
Held: Being directly involved, the pursuer was a primary victim, and accordingly not subject to the limits on claiming for psychological injury alone. There was no need for him to show any duty toward the claimant to avoid psychological damage. Psychiatric injury was arguable forseeable, and was not therefore irrelevant.

Judges:

Gordon Reid QC

Citations:

[2003] ScotCS 212, Times 06-Oct-2003

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Bourhill v Young’s Executor HL 5-Aug-1942
When considering claims for damages for shock, the court only recognised the action lying where the injury by shock was sustained ‘through the medium of the eye or the ear without direct contact.’ Wright L said: ‘No doubt, it has long ago been . .
Cited – Dooley v Cammell Laird and Co Ltd 1951
The plaintiff was a crane driver whose load of timber, drums of paint, and bags of bolts etc, and without any fault on his part, fell into the hold of a ship as they were being lowered along with scaffolding. No one was actually injured but the . .
Cited – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police HL 28-Nov-1991
The plaintiffs sought damages for nervous shock. They had watched on television, as their relatives and friends, 96 in all, died at a football match, for the safety of which the defendants were responsible. The defendant police service had not . .
Cited – White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others HL 3-Dec-1998
No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone
The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy.
Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the . .
Cited – Walker v Northumberland County Council QBD 16-Nov-1994
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.185398

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 60% to blame.
Held: Courts have consistently required drivers to recognise that they control dangerous machinery. It would be rare for a driver not to have greater responsibilty than a pedestrian for injury. In this case the claimant would be held 40% responsible.
Lady Justice Hale said: ‘The potential ‘destructive disparity’ between the parties can readily be taken into account as an aspect of blameworthiness’ and ‘It is rare indeed for a pedestrian to be found more responsible than a driver unless the pedestrian has suddenly moved into the path of an oncoming vehicle. That is not this case. The Court has consistently imposed upon the drivers of cars a high burden to reflect the fact that the car is potentially a dangerous weapon’.
Hale LJ said that the court could not avoid comparing the two parties: ‘We also accept that this court is always reluctant to interfere with the trial judge’s judgment of what apportionment between the parties is ‘just and equitable’ under the 1945 Act. But a finding as to which, if either, of the parties was the more responsible for the damage is different from a finding as to the precise extent of a less than 50 per cent contribution. There is a qualitative difference between a finding of 60 per cent contribution and a finding of 40 per cent which is not so apparent in the quantitive difference between 40 per cent and 20 per cent. It is rare indeed for a pedestrian to be found more responsible than a driver unless the pedestrian has suddenly moved into the path of an oncoming vehicle. That is not this case. The court ‘has consistently imposed upon the drivers of cars a high burden to reflect the fact that the car is potentially a dangerous weapon’: Latham LJ in Lunt v Khelifa [2002] EWCA Civ 801.’

Judges:

Ward, Waller, Hale LJJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 1107, Times 01-Sep-2003, [2004] RTR 115

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Davies v Swan Motor Co (Swansea) Ltd CA 1949
A plaintiff brought an action for damages for personal injury against the drivers of two cars.
Held: There are two aspects to apportioning responsibility between a plaintiff and defendant in an action for negligence, the respective causative . .
Cited – Stapley v Gypsum Mines Ltd HL 25-Jun-1953
Plaintiff to take own responsibility for damage
The question was whether the fault of the deceased’s fellow workman, they both having disobeyed their foreman’s instructions, was to be regarded as having contributed to the accident.
Held: A plaintiff must ‘share in the responsibility for 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 – Fitzgerald v Lane HL 14-Jul-1988
The plaintiff crossed road at a pelican crossing. The lights were against him but one car had stopped. As he passed that car he was struck by another in the second lane and again by a car coming the other way. The judge had held the three equally . .
Cited – Brown v Thompson CA 1968
A car driver drove into the back of a stationary lorry but was nevertheless held only 20% responsible.
Held: A court of appeal should only exceptionally interfere with a judge’s apportinment of responsibility for an accident.
Winn LJ . .
See also – Eagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .

Cited by:

See also – Eagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
Cited – 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.
Cited – Phethean-Hubble v Coles CA 21-Mar-2012
The claimant cyclist suffered serious injury in a collision with a car driven by the defendant. The defendant appealed against a finding that he was two thirds responsible. The case for the injured cyclist was that the motorist was going too fast. . .
Adopted – Rehill v Rider Holdings Ltd CA 16-May-2012
The claimant had been injured, being hit by the defendant’s bus. . .
Cited – Ayres v Odedra QBD 18-Jan-2013
The claimant sought damages for serious personal injury, saying that the defendant had deliberately or recklessly driven at him as a pedestrian, knocking him over. The defendant had been tried and acquitted of motoring offences. He said that the . .
Cited – Jackson v Murray and Another SC 18-Feb-2015
Child not entirely free of responsibility
The claimant child, left a school bus and stepped out from behind it into the path of the respondent’s car. She appealed against a finding of 70% contributory negligence.
Held: Her appeal succeeded (Majority, Lord Hodge and Lord Wilson . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Road Traffic, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184900

Price v Price (Trading As Poppyland Headware): CA 26 Jun 2003

The claimant sought damages from his wife for personal injuries. He had been late beginning the claim, and it was served without particulars. He then failed to serve the particulars within 14 days. Totty and then Sayers had clarified the procedure for applications for extension of time.
Held: The lower courts had failed to apply the rules as required by Sayers. The tension is between the interests of the administration of justice and the effect which the granting of relief would have on each party. Here the claimant had failed entirely to do what he ought under the rules. Justice could be achieved by a Walsh v Messeldine order, restricting the claimant to the issues and evidence made known the defendant before his default.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke Lady Justice Hale Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 888, Times 28-Jul-2003, [2003] 3 All ER 911

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 3.9

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Totty v Snowden; Hewitt v Wirral and West Cheshire Community NHS Trust CA 31-Jul-2001
Where a party had served a claim form, but then failed to serve the particulars of claim within the appropriate time limit, the court had full discretion to allow an extension of time for service. It had been argued that the same rules applied both . .
Cited – Sayers v Clarke Walker (A firm) CA 14-May-2002
In a case of any complexity, when an appeal court considered an application for leave to appeal which was filed out of time, it should have in mind the matters listed in the rules. It was not appropriate to use judge made checklists where one was . .
Cited – Costellow v Somerset County Council CA 1993
The court asked whether it was appropriate to allow an extension of time to file an appeal: ‘Save in special cases or exceptional circumstances it can rarely be appropriate on an overall assessment of what justice requires to deny the plaintiff an . .
Cited – AEI Rediffusion Music Ltd v Phonographic Performance Ltd CA 1-Feb-1999
The copyright tribunal was given a wide discretion for the awarding of costs on applications made to it for licenses. The nature of the applications and the different basis makes it dangerous to import rules for awards from the general rules on . .
Cited – Richard Thurber Carlson v Karen Townsend CA 10-Apr-2001
A claimant’s solicitor did not like the advice given by a medical expert whose identity had been agreed with the other side and then sought to instruct a different expert without obtaining the other side’s agreement first. They sought to draw a . .
Cited – Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald CA 12-May-2000
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court . .
Cited – Woodhouse v Consignia Plc; Steliou v Compton CA 7-Mar-2002
The claimant continued an action brought in her late husband’s name. The action had begun under the former rules. After the new rules came into effect, the action was automatically stayed, since no progress had been made for over a year. Her . .
Cited – Biguzzi v Rank Leisure Plc CA 26-Jul-1999
The court’s powers under the new CPR to deal with non-compliance with time limits, were wide enough to allow the court to allow re-instatement of an action previously struck out. The court could find alternative ways of dealing with any delay which . .
Applied – Dermot Gerard Richard Walsh v Andre Martin Misseldine CA 29-Feb-2000
The claimant sought damages for injuries from 1989. His claim was pursued effectively, but a four-year delay ensued after 1994. He then sought to enlarge his claim greatly by introducing a lot of new issues of which the defendant’s insurers had no . .

Cited by:

Cited – Sarah Lloyd Jones and others v T Mobile (Uk) Ltd CA 31-Jul-2003
The claimant challenged a stautory notice. The Act required the notice to be fixed to the structure in question, but because of its location, the notice was not legible without going on to private land.
Held: Appeal lay here from the County . .
Cited – Caterpillar Logistics Services (UK) Ltd v Huesca De Crean QBD 2-Dec-2011
The claimant sought an order to prevent the defendant, a former employee, from misusing its confidential information said to be held by her. Her contract contained no post employment restrictions but did seek to control confidential and other . .
Cited – Venulum Property Investments Ltd v Space Architecture Ltd and Others TCC 22-May-2013
The claimant sought an extension of time to serve the Particulars of Claim. The solicitors said that they had misread the relevant Rules.
Held: The solicitors had acted on the basis of the former practice, but the rules had been substantially . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184036

Agnew v Scott Lithgow J G Kincaid Ltd Kvaerner Govan Limited: SCS 1 Apr 2003

Common law claim against three of pursuer’s former employers for the loss, injury and damage said to have been suffered as a result of his working with vibrating tools in the course of his employment with them.

Judges:

Lord Abernethy and Lady Cosgrove and Lord Marnoch

Citations:

[2003] ScotCS 94, 2003 SCLR 426

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183971

Josephine Murray and others v Greenock Dockyard Limited: SCS 4 Jun 2003

The deceased contracted mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos, and died. He and the pursuer had married in 1959 at 21. They were married over 41 years, and had one child. The marriage had its ups and downs, and for a time during the 1980s was difficult. The deceased was drinking heavily and the pursuer had left the matrimonial home with their daughter to give him a ‘wee fright’, but returned after two weeks. He undertook to cut back on his drinking and normal married life was resumed.
Held: The marriage was generally happy and that there was a close loving relationship between them. Over the last ten years before his death the pursuer looked after the deceased and was devoted to him and in his last year organised her day so that she could be with him. The deceased was a heavy smoker and had a breathless turn in 1999. During the course of subsequent investigation the mesothelioma was diagnosed. He underwent radiotherapy (three fractions). His GP subsequently recorded that pain did not seem to be a problem. In the last year of his life the deceased was less unfortunate than some mesothelioma sufferers. He did not suffer quite as much pain and discomfort as some, and awarded andpound;20,000 to the pursuer in respect of her section 1(4) claim, and andpound;47,500 to her as executrix in respect of her section 2(1) claim for solatium.

Judges:

J. Gordon Reid, QC

Citations:

[2003] ScotCS 164, 2004 SLT 346

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Cited by:

See Also – Josephine Murray As Individual and As Executor Nominate of Joseph Murray Kirsten Allardice Andrew Allardice Josephine Murray As Executor Nominate of the Late Mary Murray v the Greenock Dockyard Company Limited OHCS 30-Apr-2004
. .
Cited – McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183906

Fytche v Wincanton Logistics Plc: CA 12 May 2003

A milk lorry driver was issued with protective boots. Stuck in a snowstorm, he tried to dig himself out. The boots leaked and he suffered frostbite.
Held: The compulsory element under the regulations is taken into account in the standard of care which the employer must observe to comply with his duty of care to the employees. The claimant recognised that he could not succeed in proving a breach of the duty of care, and his claim failed.
Waller LJ said: ‘I stress the standard of care will be a high one. Where the employer is asking the employee to wear particular footwear or clothing in place of the employee’s own, I would suggest that rightly the court would impose a high duty on an employer. But in the circumstances of this case the tiny hole was undiscoverable either by the employers or the claimant and the findings of the recorder negatived any such breach.’

Judges:

Waller LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 874, [2003] ICR 1582

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Fytche v Wincanton Logistics Plc HL 1-Jul-2004
The claimant was employed as a milk truck driver. He was issued with a pair of boots capped to protect his feet from impact. In a snowstorm, and against company advice, he sough to dig himself out. The boots leaked and he suffered frostbite. He . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Fytche v Wincanton Logistics Plc HL 1-Jul-2004
The claimant was employed as a milk truck driver. He was issued with a pair of boots capped to protect his feet from impact. In a snowstorm, and against company advice, he sough to dig himself out. The boots leaked and he suffered frostbite. He . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.184059

Channel Islands Knitwear Company Limited v Hotchkiss: PC 16 Jun 2003

PC (Jersey) The claimant sought damages for personal injuries in the form of a neck strain acquired by working long hours for her employer. Negligence was admitted, but both parties appealed.
Held: There was no sufficient evidence that the substantial injury which followed her ceasing to work for the defendant was caused by the neglect. The company remained liable for the injury to the extent they admitted.

Judges:

Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, The Rt. Hon. Justice Tipping

Citations:

[2003] UKPC 45

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC

Commonwealth, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.183885

Giullietta Galli-Atkinson v Seghal: CA 21 Mar 2003

The claimant’s daughter was fatally injured in car accident, dying shortly after. The mother came upon the scene, witnessed a police cordon at the scene of the accident and was told of her death. She later saw the injuries at the mortuary and suffered psychiatric reaction.
Held: Her appeal succeeded. The aftermath could be seen to include more than one component. The test was as to proximity. Latham LJ explained that the deceased’s mother’s visit to the mortuary could not be excluded from the events regarded as a part of the aftermath of the accident. Those events stretched from ‘the moment of the accident until the moment [the mother] left the mortuary’. In this case there could be seen to be one unbroken chain of events between the discovery of the body and the events at the mortuary. An event might be made up of a number of components as could the aftermath ‘provided that the events alleged to constitute the aftermath retain sufficient proximity to the event’.

Judges:

Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Latham, Mr Justice Wilson

Citations:

[2003] Lloyds Rep Med 285, [2003] EWCA Civ 697

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – McLoughlin v O’Brian HL 6-May-1982
The plaintiff was the mother of a child who died in an horrific accident, in which her husband and two other children were also injured. She was at home at the time of the accident, but went to the hospital immediately when she had heard what had . .
Cited – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police HL 28-Nov-1991
The plaintiffs sought damages for nervous shock. They had watched on television, as their relatives and friends, 96 in all, died at a football match, for the safety of which the defendants were responsible. The defendant police service had not . .
Cited – Hambrook v Stokes Brothers CA 1925
The defendant’s employee left a lorry at the top of a steep narrow street unattended, with the engine running and without having taken proper steps to secure it. The lorry ran violently down the hill. The plaintiff’s wife had been walking up the . .
Cited – Bourhill v Young’s Executor HL 5-Aug-1942
When considering claims for damages for shock, the court only recognised the action lying where the injury by shock was sustained ‘through the medium of the eye or the ear without direct contact.’ Wright L said: ‘No doubt, it has long ago been . .
Cited – Page v Smith HL 12-May-1995
The plaintiff was driving his car when the defendant turned into his path. Both cars suffered considerable damage but the drivers escaped physical injury. The Plaintiff had a pre-existing chronic fatigue syndrome, which manifested itself from time . .
Cited – North Glamorgan NHS Trust v Walters CA 6-Dec-2002
A new mother woke in hospital to see her baby (E) fitting. E suffered a major epileptic seizure leading to coma and irreparable brain damage. E was transferred to a London hospital and the following day the claimant was told by a consultant that E’s . .

Cited by:

Cited – Taylor v A Novo (UK) Ltd CA 18-Mar-2013
The deceased had suffered a head injury at work from the defendant’s admitted negligence. She had been making a good recovery but then collapsed and died at home from pulmonary emboli, and thrombosis which were a consequence of the injury. The . .
Cited – Liverpool Women’s Hospital NHS Foundation Trust v Ronayne CA 17-Jun-2015
The respondent was an experienced ambulance driver. His wife underwent emergency treatment at the appellant’s hospital. He had claimed as a secondary victim for the distress he suffered witnessing her suffering.
Held: The hospital’s appeal . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182326

Croft v Broadstairs and St Peter’s Town Council: CA 15 Apr 2003

The claimant acted as the town clerk. After an unexpected letter about her conduct there were meetings and correspondence. Her initial shock and distress were so exacerbated that she was rendered incapable of work through depression. The triggering factor was not the work she was required to do but receipt of the letter which the council accepted would not have been written had it known of her psychiatric problems. The judge found for Mrs Croft.
Held: The fact that two town councillors knew that Mrs Croft had been undergoing counselling was not enough to establish that the council knew of her psychiatric vulnerability. Potter LJ: that left the council in a position of employers who were entitled to expect ordinary robustness in Mrs Croft in an employment context, including disciplinary matters in which she had never been involved before. Her breakdown was not reasonably foreseeable.

Judges:

Potter LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 676

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

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

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182328

Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council: CA 6 May 2003

The claimant sought damages from the defendant for having failed to diagnose his dysexia, resulting in educational failure. The respondent argued a reasonable peson would have sought help earlier. The council appealed a refusal to strike out of the claim.
Held: Given undiagnosed dysexia, it was unlikely that he would seek help. The fact that the condition also resulted in a low self esteem should properly be taken into account in deciding whether he should have realised his cause of action. Each case fell to be decided on its own facts, but the claimant’s state of mind precluded a simple question of whether he should have sought damages earlier.

Judges:

Peter Gibson, Tuckey, Keene LJJ

Citations:

Times 14-May-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 706, Gazette 03-Jul-2003

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Robinson v St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council CA 25-Jul-2002
The claimant sought an extension of the limitation period to allow him to pursue an action. He sought damages for negligence against his former school which had failed to diagnose and treat his dyslexia.
Held: His appeal was denied. The claim . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council HL 17-Jun-2004
A attended the defendant’s schools between 1977 and 1988. He had always experienced difficulties with reading and writing and as an adult found those difficulties to be an impediment in his employment. He believed them to be the cause of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.182212

Griffiths v Vauxhall Motors Ltd: CA 12 Mar 2003

The court considered the effect of the regulations: ‘Regulation 4 and indeed 5 are concerned with the physical condition of the equipment on the assumption that they will be properly operated by properly trained and instructed personnel.’ A risk assessment was relevant to the identification of what the employer should have done.

Judges:

Clarke LJ

Citations:

[2003] EWCA Civ 412

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 4 5

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Pennington v Surrey County Council and Surrey Fire and Rescue Service CA 9-Nov-2006
The claimant firefighter crushed a finger trying to release a traffic accident victim with a heavy machine for expanding gaps in metal. The defendant appealed on liability. The court was asked whether a simple warning of the possible danger was . .
Cited – Robb v Salamis (M and I) Ltd HL 13-Dec-2006
The claimant was injured working for the defendants on a semi-submersible platform. He fell from a ladder which was not secured properly. He alleged a breach of the Regulations. The defendant denied any breach and asserted that the claimant had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.181145

Williams v Devon County Council: CA 18 Mar 2003

The claimant had recovered damages, but was ordered to pay costs since she had recovered less than was paid in. She appealed.
Held: There were anomalies in the system with regard to the recoverable social security benefits. The sums recoverable were not reduced in line with any reduction for contributory negligence, benefits could be recovered for time periods for which no award was made, and the benefits could be set off against a wider range of sums. The calculation upon which the costs decision must therefore be made to reflect no more than the amount appropriate for the head of damages against which the benefits could be offset. There remained difficulties which the court should deal with within its discretion.

Citations:

Times 25-Mar-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 365

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 36.20, Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 8

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Geoffrey Chatwin v Janice Lowther CA 21-May-2003
The case concerned the meaning of the phrase ‘compensation for earnings lost’ as it applied to self employed persons.
Held: The fact that a person’s accounts described fees as turnover, did not prevent them being still earnings within the Act. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Benefits, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180364

Keen v Tayside Contracts: OHCS 26 Feb 2003

The claimant sought damages for post traumatic stress disorder. He was a road worker instructed to attend by the defendant immediately after a terrible accident.
Held: It was a classic case of nervous shock. He was not a rescuer, and nor had he faced any personal danger, nor been physically injured. The range of people who might claim as secondary victims had been extended, but not yet this far. The concept of secondary victim focussed on the way the injury occurred, not how it was caused or by whom.

Judges:

Lady Paton

Citations:

Times 27-Mar-2003, [2003] ScotCS 55

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Citing:

Cited – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police HL 28-Nov-1991
The plaintiffs sought damages for nervous shock. They had watched on television, as their relatives and friends, 96 in all, died at a football match, for the safety of which the defendants were responsible. The defendant police service had not . .
Cited – Page v Smith HL 12-May-1995
The plaintiff was driving his car when the defendant turned into his path. Both cars suffered considerable damage but the drivers escaped physical injury. The Plaintiff had a pre-existing chronic fatigue syndrome, which manifested itself from time . .
Cited – White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others HL 3-Dec-1998
No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone
The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy.
Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the . .
Cited – McLoughlin v O’Brian HL 6-May-1982
The plaintiff was the mother of a child who died in an horrific accident, in which her husband and two other children were also injured. She was at home at the time of the accident, but went to the hospital immediately when she had heard what had . .
Cited – Sutherland v Hatton; Barber v Somerset County Council and similar CA 5-Feb-2002
Defendant employers appealed findings of liability for personal injuries consisting of an employee’s psychiatric illness caused by stress at work.
Held: Employers have a duty to take reasonable care for the safety of their employees. There are . .
Cited – Walker v Northumberland County Council QBD 16-Nov-1994
The plaintiff was a manager within the social services department. He suffered a mental breakdown in 1986, and had four months off work. His employers had refused to provide the increased support he requested. He had returned to work, but again, did . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.180103

Richard Vowles v David Evans, and The Welsh Rugby Union Limited: CA 11 Mar 2003

The claimant had been injured in a rugby match, and had recovered damages from the referee, who now appealed.
Held: The relationship was proximate, and the injury reasonably forseeable, and if the referee failed to exercise reasonable care, liability could follow. The referee accepted a role of enforcing rules to minimise danger in a dangerous sport. Here the referee had failed to enforce rules intended to protect players, and it was a decision taken whilst play was stopped, not running play.

Judges:

Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Clarke Lord Phillips M.R.

Citations:

Times 13-Mar-2003, Gazette 22-May-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 318, [2003] ECC 24, [2003] 1 WLR 1607, [2003] PIQR P29

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Vowles v Evans, the Welsh Rugby Union Limited, Davey, Taylor QBD 13-Dec-2002
The claimant sought damages (inter alia) against the amateur referee of the amateur rugby game in which he had received substantial injuries.
Held: It was consistent with the laws and spirit of the game that an amateur referee should accept a . .
Applied – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .
Cited – Smoldon v Whitworth and Nolan CA 17-Dec-1996
The claimant sued another player and the referee at a colts rugby match in which he was badly injured when the scrum collapsed. The claim against the player was dismissed, but the referee was found liable and he now appealed.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Vowles v Evans, the Welsh Rugby Union Limited, Davey, Taylor QBD 13-Dec-2002
The claimant sought damages (inter alia) against the amateur referee of the amateur rugby game in which he had received substantial injuries.
Held: It was consistent with the laws and spirit of the game that an amateur referee should accept a . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.179747

Mattis v Pollock (T/A Flamingo’s Nightclub): QBD 24 Oct 2002

The claimant sought damages after being assaulted by a doorman employed by the defendant.
Held: The responsibility of the nightclub owner for the actions of his aggressive doorman was not extinguished by the separation in time and place from what had happened in the nightclub, and that vicarious liability was therefore established. The owner had chosen to employ the doorman, knowing and approving of his aggressive tendencies, which he had encouraged rather than curbed. The court considered closely the effect of the decision in Lister v Hesley Hall. However, ‘even if it were not necessary to be able to point to some duty owed by Mr. Pollock to Mr. Mattis which was current at the time of Mr. Cranston’s attack, there was not a sufficiently close connection between the employment of Mr. Cranston by Mr. Pollock and the assault on Mr. Mattis for it to be fair and just for Mr. Pollock to be vicariously liable to Mr. Mattis for the consequences of that attack. ‘

Judges:

Richard Seymour QC J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 2177 (QB), [2003] 1 WLR 2158, [2004] 4 All ER 85, [2003] All ER (D) 10, [2004] PIQR P3, [2003] IRLR 603, [2003] ICR 1335

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 – Rose v Plenty CA 7-Jul-1975
Contrary to his employers orders, a milkman allowed children to assist him in his milkround. One was injured, and sued the milkman’s employer.
Held: The milkman had not gone so far outside the activities for which he was employed for the . .
Cited – Morris v C W Martin and Sons Ltd CA 1965
The plaintiff took her mink stole to the defendants for cleaning. An employee received and stole the fur. The judge had held that the defendants were not liable because the theft was not committed in the course of employment.
Held: The . .
Cited – Heasmans v Clarity Cleaning Co CA 1987
A contractor was taken on to clean offices and was given keys. A cleaner made expensive international telephone calls.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The contractor was not vicariously liable for his employee’s acts. There had to be shown some . .
Cited – Deatons Pty Ltd v Flew 12-Dec-1949
(High Court of Australia). A barmaid employed by the appellant threw first the beer from a glass, and then the glass in a customer’s face causing injury. The company appealed a find of vicarious liability.
Held: The act of the barmaid was not . .
Cited – Cercato-Gouveia v Kiprianou and Another CA 17-Jul-2001
Application for permission to appeal. Granted. An employer might be vicariously liable to one employee for the acts of another employee to whom he had delegated some of his duties to the claimant employee. . .
Cited – Warren v Henlys Ltd 1948
A garage attendant, as an act of personal vengeance, assaulted a customer of the garage. A customer at a petrol station was abused by the attendant as he drove off without paying. The customer then paid. He complained to the police officer he found . .
Cited – Balfron Trustees Ltd v Peterson CA 2001
The court analysed in detail the decision in Lister v Hesley Hall and continued: ‘All of these passages emphasise the necessity of identifying the duty or responsibility of the employer to the victim. If such a duty or responsibility exists, the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust CA 16-Mar-2005
The claimant had sought damages against his employer, saying that they had failed in their duty to him under the 1997 Act in failing to prevent harassment by a manager. He appealed a strike out of his claim.
Held: The appeal succeeded. The . .
Cited – Majrowski v Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust HL 12-Jul-2006
Employer can be liable for Managers Harassment
The claimant employee sought damages, saying that he had been bullied by his manager and that bullying amounting to harassment under the 1997 Act. The employer now appealed a finding that it was responsible for a tort committed by a manager, saying . .
Cited – Weddall v Barchester Healthcare Ltd CA 24-Jan-2012
Parties appealed against judgments dismissing their claims of vicarious liability as against their employers after assaults by co-employees.
Held: Appeals were dismissed and allowed according to their facts.
In one case, one employee . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Vicarious Liability

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.178900

Vowles v Evans, the Welsh Rugby Union Limited, Davey, Taylor: QBD 13 Dec 2002

The claimant sought damages (inter alia) against the amateur referee of the amateur rugby game in which he had received substantial injuries.
Held: It was consistent with the laws and spirit of the game that an amateur referee should accept a duty of care for the safety of players. The rapport between players and referee would not be reduced for such a responsibility. The duty would be breached if the referee failed to take reasonable care, by the sensible and appropriate application of the laws of rugby in the particular context of the game being played.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Morland

Citations:

Times 31-Dec-2002, [2002] EWHC 2612 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appealed to – Richard Vowles v David Evans, and The Welsh Rugby Union Limited CA 11-Mar-2003
The claimant had been injured in a rugby match, and had recovered damages from the referee, who now appealed.
Held: The relationship was proximate, and the injury reasonably forseeable, and if the referee failed to exercise reasonable care, . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Richard Vowles v David Evans, and The Welsh Rugby Union Limited CA 11-Mar-2003
The claimant had been injured in a rugby match, and had recovered damages from the referee, who now appealed.
Held: The relationship was proximate, and the injury reasonably forseeable, and if the referee failed to exercise reasonable care, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 07 June 2022; Ref: scu.178818

Roe v Sheffield City Council and others: CA 17 Jan 2003

The claimant sought damages after his car was involved in an accident when a wheel struck a part of a tramway standing proud of the road surface. The defendant argued that they were excused liability by the 1988 Act, incorporating the effects of the 1870 Act.
Held: The 1988 Act did not provide a full statement of the defendant’s liability so as to exclude their liability under the 1980 Act. The standard of maintenance was defined by reference to safety. A small difference may be safe, but the rail stood sufficiently proud of the roadway to lift the tyre from the roadway and break its grip. The 1988 Act shifted responsibility to the tramway operator within the initial 12 months of operation.

Judges:

Pill, Sedley, Hale LJJ

Citations:

Times 24-Jan-2003, [2003] EWCA Civ 1, [2004] QB 653, [2003] BLGR 389, [2003] 2 WLR 848

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Tramways Act 1870 25 28, South Yorkshire Light Rail Transit Act 1988, Highways Act 1980 41

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Dublin United Tramways Co Ltd v Martin Fitzgerald HL 1903
The plaintiff sued when his horse slipped on tramlines in the road and fell. Stone setts or paving between the rails of a tramway in Grafton Street, Dublin, had become slippery owing to the grit or roughness of setts being worn away. In that state, . .
Cited – Simon v Islington Borough Council CA 1943
A cyclist was killed because of the dangerous condition of an abandoned tramway. A rail and the adjoining stone setts were not level with each other. The London Passenger Transport Board had given the highway authority the notice required by statute . .
Cited – Goodes v East Sussex County Council HL 16-Jun-2000
The claimant was driving along a road. He skidded on ice, crashed and was severely injured. He claimed damages saying that the Highway authority had failed to ‘maintain’ the road.
Held: The statutory duty on a highway authority to keep a road . .

Cited by:

See Also – Roe v Sheffield City Council, South Yorkshire Light Rail Ltd, South Yorkshire Supertram Ltd, Balfour Beatty Power Construction Ltd CA 23-Mar-2004
. .
Cited – Morrison Sports Ltd and Others v Scottish Power SC 28-Jul-2010
A fire caused substantial damage to buildings. It arose from a ‘shim’ placed in a fuse box which then overheated. The parties disputed whose employee had inserted the shim. The Act under which the Regulations had been made was repealed and replaced . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Transport, Local Government, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178774

Beaton v Devon County Council: CA 31 Oct 2002

The respondent provided a cycle way. As it passed through a tunnel, there were drainage gullies at the side. The claimant stepped off her cycle, and hurt her foot in the gully. The tunnel was well lit, and no previous complaints had been made. The authority appealed a finding of negligence.
Held: The finding that the accident was foreseeable when there had been no previous complaint amounted to creating an equivalence between its duties in negligence and its duties under the 1957 Act. There was no such equivalence, or duty to prevent accidents. The appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Judge, May LJJ

Citations:

Gazette 09-Jan-2003, [2002] EWCA Civ 1675

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers Liability Act 1957

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Local Government, Negligence

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178639

Dugmore v Swansea NHS Trust and Another: CA 21 Nov 2002

The claimant had become sensitive to latex dust while working for the first employer, then suffered an anaphylactic shock when coming into contact with the dust while employed by the second.
Held: The regulations required that ‘every employer shall ensure that the exposure of his employee to a substance hazardous to health is either prevented, or where this is not reasonably practicable, adequately controlled.’ The words were clear. The duty was absolute except for reasonable practicality, when the duty was simply to ensure adequate protection. There was no limitation on the second limb to allow for relative risk, or reasonable practicality.

Judges:

Tuckey, Hale, LJJ, Sir Denis Hale

Citations:

Times 09-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1689

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1988 (1988 No 1657), Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1994 (1994 No 3246), Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1999 (1999 No 437) 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Stokes v Guest Keen and Nettlefold (Nuts and Bolts) Ltd QBD 1968
An employee had been exposed at work over a long period to mineral oil which, on a daily basis, had saturated his clothing and come into contact with his skin. As a result of this he developed cancer of the scrotum from which he eventually died. The . .
Cited – Bilton v Fastnet Highlands LTd OHCS 20-Nov-1997
It was for the defenders to say what steps they had been taken to comply with their obligations under the Regulations, not for an employee complainant to say what should happen. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178361

Kearn-Price v Kent County Council: CA 30 Oct 2002

The claimant was injured, being hit in the face by a football in a school playground. It was before school started. There had been accidents, and there were rules which had not been enforced. The school appealed a finding of negligence.
Held: ‘a school owes to all pupils who are lawfully on its premises the general duty to take such measures to care for their health and safety as are reasonable in all the circumstances. It is neither just nor reasonable to say that a school owes no duty of care at all to pupils who are at school before or after school hours.’ The governing principle is that the school is required to do what is reasonable in all the circumstances. There was a finding by the judge that if the teachers had sought to enforce the ban, the pupils would have taken note. That inference was properly drawn.

Judges:

Lord Justice Dyson, Lord Justice Schiemann, Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1539

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Woodbridge School v Chittock CA 27-Jun-2002
A child on a school skiing trip, had been injured whilst skiing on-piste, but unsupervised. The school appealed a finding of liability.
Held: The teachers and supervisors owed the same duty of care as a reasonably careful parent with some . .
Cited – Geyer v Downs and another 1977
(High Court of Australia) A pupil suffered injuries when hit by a softball bat by a fellow pupil at playing the game in the school playground before school. There was no supervision. The jury awarded the appellant damages. The verdict was set aside . .
Cited – Hippolyte v London Borough of Bexley CA 1995
In many cases the trial judge is in a better position than an appellate court to make the correct finding as to inferences from the facts found: ‘It is in my judgment very important to bear in mind that this is an appeal on issues of fact, albeit . .
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 – Wilson v Governors of Sacred Heart Roman Catholic School CA 5-Nov-1997
A nine year old pupil was injured by a fellow pupil whirling an anorak around his head. The accident occurred when they were on their way from the school buildings to the school gates at the end of school day. There was no member of staff on duty to . .
Cited – Saunders v Henry Adderley PC 24-Jun-1998
(Bahamas) In the absence of other recorded reasons for a decision of an appellate court a contemporaneous note taken by junior counsel and exhibited on affidavit would be taken as evidence of the reasons given. When the question is what inferences . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury, Education

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178400

Hewison v Meridian Shipping Pte, Coflexip Stena Offshore Ltd, Flex Installer Offshore Ltd: CA 11 Dec 2002

The claimant was awarded damages for injuries suffered in his work as a seaman. The respondents claimed that he should not receive damages, since he had made false declarations as to his health in order to obtain employment, hiding his epilepsy condition.
Held: Clunis established that the court would not support an action founded upon an illegal or immoral act. Here the action for the loss of future earnings was founded on the possibility of his continued unlawful employment. (Ward LJ dissenting)
Clarke LJ, with whom Tuckey LJ agreed, said: ‘It is common ground that there are cases in which public policy will prevent a claimant from recovering the whole of the damages which, but for the rule of public policy, he would otherwise have recovered. The principle can perhaps be stated as a variation of the maxim so that it reads ex turpi causa non oritur damnum, where the damnum is the loss which would have been recovered but for the relevant illegal or immoral act. A classic example is the principle that a person who makes his living from burglary cannot have damages assessed on the basis of what he would have earned from burglary but for the defendant’s negligence.
To my mind the authorities support that approach. They seem to me to support the proposition that where a claimant has to rely upon his or her own unlawful act in order to establish the whole or part of his or her claim the claim will fail either wholly or in part . . In the present context the principle can be seen from the decision of this court in Hunter v Butler [1996] RTR 396, although it has to be said that the case does give rise to some difficulties of interpretation . . The principle applied by Hobhouse LJ is, as I see it, that stated at p 405b, namely: ‘If a plaintiff comes to court and asserts as part of her case that she would have committed criminal acts and bases her claim on such an assertion she cannot recover in a court of law on that basis.’ That appears to me to be substantially the same test as that adopted in the ex turpi causa non oritur actio cases, as stated in the passage from the judgment of Beldam LJ in the Clunis case [1998] QB 978 . .
I am not sure whether it is quite the same principle as that applied by Waite LJ but it does not seem to me necessary to consider that question further because, since Hirst LJ agreed with the judgment of Hobhouse LJ and since the principle just stated is part of the ratio decidendi of Hunter v Butler, we are bound to follow it. . .
In my opinion Hobhouse LJ must have had in mind a case where the claimant bases his or her claim upon his or her unlawful act in a substantial way. It is not, however, in my opinion sufficient that he or she has been party to some collateral or insignificant illegality or unlawful act. Thus, . . a claimant is entitled to be compensated for his loss of earnings even though he had in the past failed to disclose them to the Inland Revenue . . .’

Judges:

Lord Justice Clarke, Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Tuckey

Citations:

Times 28-Dec-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1821, [2003] PIQR 252, [2003] ICR 766, [2002] All ER (D) 146

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Clunis (By his Next Friend Prince) v Camden and Islington Health Authority CA 5-Dec-1997
The plaintiff had killed someone and, as a result, been convicted of manslaughter and ordered to be detained in a secure hospital when subject to after-care under section 117 of the 1983 Act. He sought damages from the health authority on the basis . .
Cited – Hunter v Butler 1986
. .
Appeal from – Hewison v Meridian Shipping Services Pte Ltd, Coflexip Stena Offshore Ltd, Flex Installer Offshore Ltd QBD 30-Nov-2001
The applicant had been severely injured at work. He was an epileptic, and had not disclosed his condition to his employers, who because of the safety aspects of the work on oil rigs could not have employed him if he had disclosed the sickness. The . .
Cited – Euro-Diam Ltd v Bathurst CA 1988
The court had found that securities had been registered misleadingly in the US. The court held that it could not aid illegality. The court considered the defence of ‘ex turpi cause non oritur actio’. Kerr L.J: ‘The ex turpi causa defence ultimately . .

Cited by:

Cited – Gray v Thames Trains Ltd and Another CA 25-Jun-2008
The claimant was a victim of the Ladbroke Grove rail crash. He later committed and was convicted of a manslaughter and detained under the 1983 Act. He said that the accident had caused a major personality change. The defendant relied on the defence . .
Cited – Cheltenham Borough Council v Laird QBD 15-Jun-2009
The council sought damages saying that their former chief executive had not disclosed her history of depressive illness when applying for her job.
Held: The replies were not dishonest as the form could have been misconstrued. The claim failed. . .
Cited – Moore Stephens (A Firm) v Stone Rolls Ltd (in liquidation) HL 30-Jul-2009
The appellants had audited the books of the respondent company, but had failed to identify substantial frauds by an employee of the respondent. The auditors appealed a finding of professional negligence, relying on the maxim ex turpi causa non . .
Cited – Soutzos v Asombang and Others ChD 21-Jun-2011
The claimant had obtained a freezing order against the defendants. His claim having been dismissed, the court now considered if and what damages should be paid under the cross-undertaking he had given.
Held: Setting out and applying the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.178451

Robinson v St Helens Metropolitan Borough Council: CA 25 Jul 2002

The claimant sought an extension of the limitation period to allow him to pursue an action. He sought damages for negligence against his former school which had failed to diagnose and treat his dyslexia.
Held: His appeal was denied. The claim was one for personal injury, but the question of whether to extend the time period is one for a judge’s discretion. The prejudice to the claimant in being denied the right to bring an action must not be over-emphasised. Here, the long delay meant also that the defendant would have great difficulty in unearthing its records to defend its action. There were no grounds for interfering with the judge’s discretion. As to whether a failue to ameliorate dyslexia could constitute a personal injury: ‘Dyslexia . . may itself be an ‘impairment of a person’s mental condition’. It is not of course caused by the defendant; but negligent failure to ameliorate the consequences of dyslexia by appropriate teaching may be said to continue the injury, in the same way that the negligent failure to cure or ameliorate a congenital physical condition so that it continues, could give rise to an action for personal injuries. Although as I understand it dyslexia cannot be cured, a dyslexic person can be trained to overcome the difficulties in reading and writing which he experiences.’

Judges:

Lords Justice Peter Gibson and Brooke and Sir Murray Stuart-Smith

Citations:

Gazette 10-Oct-2002, [2003] PIQR P128, [2002] EWCA Civ 1099

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council CA 6-May-2003
The claimant sought damages from the defendant for having failed to diagnose his dysexia, resulting in educational failure. The respondent argued a reasonable peson would have sought help earlier. The council appealed a refusal to strike out of the . .
Cited – Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council HL 17-Jun-2004
A attended the defendant’s schools between 1977 and 1988. He had always experienced difficulties with reading and writing and as an adult found those difficulties to be an impediment in his employment. He believed them to be the cause of the . .
Cited – Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.177396

O’Neill v DSG Retail Ltd: CA 31 Jul 2002

The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for damages after he was injured at work. He claimed he had been asked to work in breach of the Regulations.
Held: It was easy but wrong to conflate the issues of causation and forseeability. The judge had so erred. The issue of causation should be tested only once the question of whether there had been a breach of the Regulations, had first been answered. The Regulations asked about tasks performed regularly. This was not a question about each particular lifting task, but about each kind of task. The employers were required to do what was necessary to reduce the risk to the lowest practicable level.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson, Lord Justice Chadwick and Mr Justice Nelson

Citations:

Times 09-Sep-2002, Gazette 17-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1139, [2003] ICR 222

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 (SI 1992 No 2793) 4(1)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Koonjul v Thameslink Healthcare Services 19-May-2000
. .

Cited by:

Cited – Cox v Ministry of Justice CA 19-Feb-2014
Appeal against rejection of claim for personal injury. While working as the catering manager at HM Prison Swansea, the Claimant was injured in an accident caused by the negligence of a prisoner carrying out paid work under her supervision. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.175057

Halloran v Delaney: CA 6 Sep 2002

The claimant had succeeded in his claim for personal injuries, and had issued costs only proceedings. The defendant challenged the ‘success fee’ claimed as part of the conditional fee arrangement.
Held: The costs recoverable were to be reasonable and proportionate. The success fee was not to be judged with hindsight, but must allow for where the risk was minimal. The Law Society Model CFA covered both the claim and proper enforcement steps, including the claim for costs if necessary. Could a success fee be recovered in respect of the costs of pursuing the costs only proceedings? It could, and given the state of uncertainty at the time when the agreement was made, a 20% uplift was appropriate. However the court also considered the general success uplift in simple cases to be too high, and the court should ordinarily order an uplift of 5% only.

Judges:

Brooke, Peter Gibson, Tuckey LJJ

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1258, [2003] 1 WLR 28, [2002] 3 Costs LR 503, [2003] PIQR P5, [2003] RTR 147, [2003] RTR 9, [2003] 1 All ER 775

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Callery v Gray (No 2) CA 31-Jul-2001
A plaintiff could recover the costs of insuring himself against the risk of having to pay the other sides costs, and finding his own costs irrecoverable (after the event or ATE insurance). The earlier case had decided that such premiums may be . .

Cited by:

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

Costs, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.175059

Hopley, Regina (on the Application of) v Liverpool Health Authority and others: Admn 30 Jul 2002

The respondent Health Authority had refused to consent to payment to the claimant of damages for personal injury by periodical payments under a with profits structured settlement made under Section 2 of the 1996 Act.
Held: The decision was not amenable to judicial review because the function being performed by the Health Authority, as it affected the claimant, was a private one.
Pitchford J set out three elements to be identified when considering whether a public body with statutory powers was exercising a public function amenable to judicial review or a private function that was not. These were:
i) Whether the defendant was a public body exercising statutory powers;
ii) Whether the function being performed in the exercise of those powers was a public or a private one; and
iii) Whether the defendant was performing a public duty owed to the claimant in the particular circumstances under consideration.

Judges:

Pitchford J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1723 (Admin)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Regina (Tucker) v Director General of the National Crime Squad CA 17-Jan-2003
The applicant was a senior officer seconded to the National Crime Squad. He complained that his secondment had been terminated in a manner which was unfair, and left him tainted without opportunity to reply. He appealed against rejection of his . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury, Judicial Review

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.175140

Crooks v Ebanks: PC 30 Mar 1999

PC (Jamaica) Whilst chasing an armed criminal, the police officer tripped, discharging his gun, which hit the claimant. She sought damages. The officer claimed immunity under the Act.
Held: The dropping of the revolver and the discharging of the round were not for the purpose of vindicating and giving effect to the law, and the officer did not have immunity. In the historical context of the distinction between an action on the case and an action for trespass, a claim in respect of consequential injury arising from negligence would have been brought as an action on the case. Therefore it would have been unnecessary to provide in section 33 that: ‘Every action to be brought against any Constable for any act done by him in the execution of his office, shall be an action on the case as for a tort’, if that section was to apply to a claim in negligence for consequential injury.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Steyn, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton, Sir Andrew Leggatt

Citations:

[1999] UKPC 17, Appeal No 32 of 1997

Links:

Bailii, PC, PC, PC

Statutes:

Constabulary Force Act 1935 33

Citing:

Cited – Trobridge v Hardy 1995
(High Court of Australia) Police (W.A.) – Action against police constable – Acts done in carrying the provisions of the Police Act 1892-1953 into effect – Person ‘suspected of offending against’ Act – Statutory protection without. ‘direct proof of . .
Cited – Hermann v Seneschal 1862
In considering immunity given to officers acting in execution of their duty, ‘I think the governing question for the jury was, whether the defendant really believed that the facts existed which would bring the case within the statute . . , and . .
Cited – Theobald v Crichmore 1818
The object (sc. of the protective statute) ‘was clearly to protect persons acting illegally, but in supposed pursuance, and with a bona fide intention of discharging their duty under the Act of Parliament’ . .
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 . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Commonwealth, Personal Injury, Police

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174597

Gwilliam v West Hertfordshire Hospitals NHS Trust and Others: CA 24 Jul 2002

The claimant sought damages. She had been injured after the negligent erection of a stand which was known to be potentially hazardous. The contractor was uninsured, and the claimant sought damages from the Hospital which had arranged the fair in its grounds to raise funds.
Held: The hospital was liable under the Act. A splat wall, where people bounced off a trampoline to be stuck to a wall by Velcro. The hospital should have known this was dangerous. They could avoid liability by employing a reputable and competent contractor. They had requested sight of his insurance but did not know it had expired before the day. The hospital had a duty to the claimant, but had not fulfilled it. The actual claim was the difference between what had been recovered and what would have been recoverable if the contractor had been insured. The claim was therefore one of economic loss.
Lord Woolf categorised the claim not as one for economic loss but as a claim for damages for personal injury. The hospital owed the claimant a duty of care under s 2 of the Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 to take reasonable care for her safety in using the premises to which she had been invited. That included a duty to take reasonable care to satisfy itself as to the competence of the supplier of the splat-wall. In order to discharge that duty the hospital ought to have asked him about his insurance position as evidence which was relevant to whether or not he was likely to be competent. Having asked the question, it was reasonable for the hospital to accept the supplier’s answer.
Waller LJ considered that on the particular facts of the case the occupier’s duty of care to its visitors required it to take reasonable steps to satisfy itself as to the supplier’s financial viability to meet any claim against it, whether by insurance or otherwise. He agreed with Lord Woolf that the hospital was under no duty to verify the supplier’s statement about his insurance position by requiring to see a copy of the policy.
Sedley LJ said that there was a difference in principle between harm to a person or property and insurance against inability to recover damages for such harm. The occupier owed a duty to take reasonable care to use only competent contractors, but he did not consider that the occupier owed any duty of care to its visitors to take steps to ensure that its independent contractors would be insured or otherwise able to meet any claim for damages for negligence. He expressed concern about the ramifications if the court were to impose such a duty on a public institution which invited people into its grounds. He asked rhetorically: ‘What is there, in a legal system which offers equality before the law by seeking to treat like cases alike, to contain this case in a category peculiar to its own facts? If the ambit of a public institution’s duty to its visitors embraces an obligation to check on contractors’ insurance, why will a private person whose garden is used for a local fete not equally be liable to pay a sum representing full personal injury damages to a visitor injured, perhaps badly, by the negligent supervision of a coconut shy or a greasy pole by an uninsured stall holder? Or why will a householder who fails to check that his or her builder is insured not have to pay heavy damages to a neighbour who has been unable to make a worthwhile claim against the builder when a nail through a water pipe brings the neighbour’s ceiling down or a carelessly handled blow torch burns their house down?’

Judges:

Lord Woolf, Lord Chief Justice, Lord Justice Waller and Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

Times 07-Aug-2002, Gazette 03-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1041, [2002] 3 WLR 1425, [2003] QB 443

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 2(4)(b)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Caparo Industries Plc v Dickman and others HL 8-Feb-1990
Limitation of Loss from Negligent Mis-statement
The plaintiffs sought damages from accountants for negligence. They had acquired shares in a target company and, relying upon the published and audited accounts which overstated the company’s earnings, they purchased further shares.
Held: The . .

Cited by:

Cited – Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club CA 7-Nov-2003
The claimant was very badly injured at a bonfire organised by the defendants. He had been asked to help with a part of the display, organised by sub-contractors, which exploded as he was filling it.
Held: The nature of the activity to be . .
Cited – Naylor (T/A Mainstreet) v Payling CA 7-May-2004
The claimant was injured by a door attendant employed as an independent contractor by the defendant.
Held: The defendant’s duty in selecting an independent contractor was limited to assessing the competence of the contractor. The duties of . .
Cited – Glaister and Others v Appelby-In-Westmorland Town Council CA 9-Dec-2009
The claimant was injured when at a horse fair. A loose horse kicked him causing injury. They claimed in negligence against the council for licensing the fair without ensuring that public liability insurance. The Council now appealed agaiinst a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Land, Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174703

Pratley v Surrey County Council: QBD 31 Jul 2002

The claimant sought damages. She had been employed by the respondent in the social services department but came to suffer from stress, and had to give up work.
Held: A claimant in such a position had to do something to make it clear to the defendant that she was suffering stress. It could not be for the employer to have to work this out. General forseeability of this kind of risk is not enough. In this case the claimant had not done enough.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Buckley

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1608 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Appealed to – Pratley v Surrey County Council CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant sought damages for personal injury namely stress suffered in the course of her work as a care manager. She said that she had been overworked, and suffered depression when a proposal for reducing the work load remained unimplemented. The . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Pratley v Surrey County Council CA 25-Jul-2003
The claimant sought damages for personal injury namely stress suffered in the course of her work as a care manager. She said that she had been overworked, and suffered depression when a proposal for reducing the work load remained unimplemented. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Employment, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174448

XYZ and others v Schering Health: QBD 29 Jul 2002

The court heard seven lead claims in group litigation against three drug companies in respect of their combined oral contraceptive products.

Judges:

Mackay J

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 1420 (QB), (2002) 70 BMLR 88

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

See Also – Afrika and others v Cape Plc and others; X Y Z and Others v Schering health Care Ltd; Sayers and Others v Merck, Smithkline Beecham plc MMR/MR vaccine litigation CA 21-Dec-2001
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries after immunisation with the MMR vaccine. . .
See Also – Sayers and Others v Smith Kline Beecham plc and Others; X, Y, Z and Others v Schering Health Care Ltd and Others; Afrika and Others v Cape plc CA 21-Dec-2001
The case concerned the management of substantial multi-party actions, and in particular the form of costs orders. The claimants sought a payment of the ‘common costs’ element to be made payable as the appropriate relative common issues were . .

Cited by:

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 . .
See Also – XYZ v Schering Health Care: Oral Contraceptive Litigation SCCO 31-Mar-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Consumer, Consumer, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174352

Coxall v Goodyear Great Britain Limited: CA 22 Jul 2002

The employee worked at a plant using chemicals. After starting, the work system was changed. The staff were given the best protection available, but the claimant suffered a pre-existing tendency to asthma, which was excited by the chemicals used. He was awarded damages, and the employer appealed.
Held: The employer should have been alerted by a doctor’s memorandum about his condition. It was not for the employee alone to assess the risk. Following Withers, the employer could be under a duty to make an assessment which would lead them to conclude that given his personal sensitivity, and employee should be dismissed from working in an otherwise safe environment.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown and Lord Justice Brooke

Citations:

Times 05-Aug-2002, Gazette 03-Oct-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 1010

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Considered – Withers v Perry Chain Co Ltd CA 21-Jul-1961
An employee with dermatitis returned to work when it was known both to him and his employers that continuing to work would carry a small risk of it recurring or being exacerbated.
Held: The Court allowed the employer’s appeal against the trial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174346

Davis and Another v Balfour Kilpatrick Ltd and others: CA 23 May 2002

The claimants sought damages for sickness they claimed arose from exposure to radiation when erecting radio transmitter masts. The risk had been recognised, and a safety assessment undertaken and adjustments made to the transmitter power before work began, to reduce the levels below those recommended by the NRPB. The judge did not find evidence of exposure to excess levels, but failed to make a finding as to causation. He dismissed the claim.
Held: There was no obligation on a judge to make a finding on every averment. Some common sense must be applied. There were no grounds for challenging the judge’s assessment of the evidence. Riggers on transmission masts work in an environment where they are exposed to unknown dangers, because scientific knowledge is incomplete. Human rights issues were raised because one of the operators of the mast was a public body, the BBC. Nevertheless this point had arisen only on appeal, and the judge could not be criticised for failing to develop creative points.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy Lord Justice Tuckey And Mr Justice Jackson

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 736

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Marcic v Thames Water Utilities Ltd TCC 10-Jul-2001
. .
Doubted – Read v J Lyons and Co Ltd HL 1946
The plaintiff was employed by the Ministry of Defence, inspecting a weapons factory. A shell exploded injuring her. No negligence was alleged. The company worked as agent for the ministry.
Held: The respondents were not liable, since there had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Health and Safety, Personal Injury, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172239

ATH and another (Executors of the Estate of M, decd) v MS: CA 11 Jun 2002

The claimants were the children of the deceased, seeking damages following the death of their mother. At the time of the death they were not living with their father but moved to live with him after the death. They claimed damages for the services provided by the father and his new wife.
Held: The new support accrued as a result of the accident and was to be disregarded under the section. However the trust under which any damages were paid would be unlikely to be enforced, that is the father would not ask for payment for the services, and following Hunt, if the terms of the trust seemed unlikely to be fulfilled then the court awarding damages should take steps to avoid the outcome.

Judges:

Lord Justice Kennedy, Lord Justice Tuckey and Mr Justice Jackson

Citations:

Times 03-Jul-2002, Gazette 08-Aug-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 792, [2002] 3 WLR 1179, [2003] QB 965

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1976 4

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hunt v Severs CA 13-May-1993
The plaintiff was injured by the negligence of the defendant. The defendant provided gratuitous nursing care and other assistance to the plaintiff. They married each other.
Held: Where the Plaintiff was voluntarily cared for by the Tortfeasor, . .
Disapproved – Bordin v St Mary’s NHS Trust QBD 2000
The claimant’s mother had died as a result of the negligence of the respondent.
Held: The calculation of past and future dependancy should refer to the care whether paid or unpaid actually provide or expected to be provided by the deceased. . .

Cited by:

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

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172267

Stenning v Secretary of State for the Home Office: CA 31 May 2002

The Home Office appealed a finding of liability in damages to the claimant. He was a prisoner injured by another prisoner after being taken captive within a cell. The attacker had been involved in incidents of violence but not for many years. He had made many threats of violence, and was still seen as a risk to be mixed with other prisoners.
Held: The management of such prisoners was exceptionally difficult. No negligence had been shown and the appeal allowed. The person directly responsible was the fellow prisoner.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 793

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.172184

Matthews v Ministry of Defence: CA 29 May 2002

The Ministry appealed against a finding that the Act, which deprived the right of a Crown employee to sue for personal injuries, was an infringement of his human rights.
Held: The restriction imposed by the section was not a procedural section, but a substantive one which delimited the rights and liabilities arising under civil law. Accordingly, human right slaw did not apply. The Commission on human rights was wrong to suggest that such rights might be affected.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Mummery and Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

[2002] 1 WLR 2621, Times 31-May-2002, Gazette 04-Jul-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 773

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crown Proceedings Act 1947 10, European Convention on Human Rights 6.1

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Pinder v United Kingdom ECHR 1984
(Commission) ‘The Commission . . recalls that the concept of ‘civil rights’ is autonomous. Thus, irrespective of whether a right is in domestic law labelled ‘public’, ‘private’, ‘civil’ or something else, it is ultimately for the Convention organs . .
Cited – Dyer v United Kingdom ECHR 1985
. .
Appealed to – Matthews v Ministry of Defence HL 13-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act.
Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided . .
Appeal from – Matthews v The Ministry of Defence QBD 22-Jan-2002
The claimant sought damages for asbestos related diseases, incurred whilst working as an engineer in the Royal Navy. He claimed that the bar on claiming against the Crown infringed his rights to a remedy. The 1987 Act removed the bar to a claim, but . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Matthews v Ministry of Defence HL 13-Feb-2003
The claimant sought damages against the Crown, having suffered asbestosis whilst in the armed forces. He challenged the denial to him of a right of action by the 1947 Act.
Held: Human rights law did not create civil rights, but rather voided . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Armed Forces, Human Rights

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.171334

Bogle and Others v Mcdonalds Resturants Ltd: QBD 25 Mar 2002

A group of claimants sued for personal injuries caused by the spillage of hot drinks served by the defendant, McDonald’s. The issues included: ‘(5) Whether there was a duty upon the defendant to warn its customers as to the risk of scalding from hot drinks. (6) If there was such a duty, whether the defendant was in breach of it.’
Held: The court discused these issues and noted the contentions for the claimants that there was a duty to warn for various reasons, including: ‘(5) Whilst some customers might be aware of the risk, the duty to warn arises because some may not be aware of the risk.’ He said: ‘I think it a fair inference that small children very rarely buy or intentionally consume coffee and tea in McDonald’s Restaurants. (It is certainly the case that in all the claims that have been brought, the hot drinks were bought by an adult.) In my opinion, McDonald’s could therefore expect that the great majority of those who bought hot drinks in their restaurants would be in their teenage years or above. In my judgement, these customers could be taken to know that the coffee and tea they were buying was hot and could cause a nasty scalding injury if it spilled on someone. Most customers would not know precisely how hot the drink was, but they would know that tea and coffee is made with very hot water. Nor would most customers know just how severe the scalding injury could be, but they would know that it could be very painful and serious. They would also know that drinks occasionally get spilled in restaurants such as those run by McDonald’s.’ and ‘Whether McDonald’s were negligent in not warning their customers depends on an objective assessment of all the circumstances, including the risk of injury and the customers’ appreciation of those matters that gave rise to the risk. As I have said, I am quite satisfied that those who bought coffee and tea could be taken to know that such drinks sometimes get spilled and are served at temperatures which cause serious and painful injury if they come into contact with someone’s skin. I accordingly find that there was no duty on McDonald’s to warn their customers about the risk posed by the temperatures at which tea and coffee were served, notwithstanding the warnings they gave to their employees and the fact that from 1995 a warning has been printed on the cups.’

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Field

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 490 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Cited by:

Cited – McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.170026

Campbell v North Lanarkshire Council and Scottish Power Plc: SCS 30 Jun 1999

Judges:

Lord Reed

Citations:

[1999] ScotCS 163

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Citing:

Considered – White, Frost and others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and others HL 3-Dec-1998
No damages for Psychiatric Harm Alone
The House considered claims by police officers who had suffered psychiatric injury after tending the victims of the Hillsborough tragedy.
Held: The general rules restricting the recovery of damages for pure psychiatric harm applied to the . .
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 – Simmons v British Steel plc HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant was injured at work as a consequence of the defender’s negligence. His injuries became more severe, and he came to suffer a disabling depression.
Held: the Inner House had been wrong to characterise the Outer House decision as . .
Cited – Simmons v British Steel plc HL 29-Apr-2004
The claimant was injured at work as a consequence of the defender’s negligence. His injuries became more severe, and he came to suffer a disabling depression.
Held: the Inner House had been wrong to characterise the Outer House decision as . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.169567

L C Application for Judicial Review of Decisions of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board: OHCS 14 May 1999

A claim for compensation for damages resulting from repeated acts of indecent exposure could properly be refused on the basis that the crime was not a crime of violence as such. The Board must consider in each case whether the act complained of was, in the ordinary and natural meaning of the words, a crime of violence.

Judges:

Lord Macfadyen

Citations:

Times 03-Jun-1999, 1999 SCLR 992, [1999] ScotCS 114

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Statutes:

Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 1990

Personal Injury, Scotland

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.169614

Robertson Or Macey-Lillie v Lanarkshire Health Board &C: OHCS 26 May 2000

Economic circumstances have not changed sufficiently yet to alter the rate of three per cent used when calculating damages in personal injury cases. Though the returns on government stocks had fallen the figure of two per cent was not yet appropriate, and lay within the range of returns contemplated when the original figures had been set.

Judges:

Lord Philip

Citations:

Times 28-Jun-2000, [2000] ScotCS 136

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Statutes:

Damages Act 1996

Damages, Personal Injury, Scotland

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.169324

McTear v Imperial Tobacco Limited: SCS 23 Oct 2001

The pursuer sought damages from the defenders after her husband had died, she said, after suffering injury smoking their cigarettes.

Judges:

Lord McCluskey

Citations:

[2001] ScotCS 239

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Citing:

See Also – McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd IHCS 30-Sep-1996
The pursuer sought damages from the tobacco company following the death of her husband.
Held: A first instance decision on caution for expenses should be set aside only if plainly wrong. . .
See Also – McTear v Scottish Legal Aid Board 1995
The court refused the pursuer’s claim for judicial review of the board’s refusal of legal aid to pursue a claim for negligence against tobacco manufacturers following the death of her husband. . .

Cited by:

See Also – McTear v Imperial Tobacco Ltd OHCS 31-May-2005
The pursuer sought damages after her husband’s death from lung cancer. She said that the defenders were negligent in having continued to sell him cigarettes knowing that they would cause this.
Held: The action failed. The plaintiff had not . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168902

Liennard v Slough Borough Council: QBD 15 Mar 2002

The claimant sought damages from the respondents who had been responsible for his education, for having failed to diagnose his learning difficulties. The school had recognised that he was underachieving, but diagnosis as to the reason was not easy.
Held: Though the school had acted properly, it had failed to call in specialist help and that would have assisted. Damages were awarded following Blamire.

Judges:

Mr Justice Henriques

Citations:

[2002] EWHC 398 (QB), HQ 9902793

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Applied – X (Minors) v Bedfordshire County Council; M (A Minor) and Another v Newham London Borough Council; Etc HL 29-Jun-1995
Liability in Damages on Statute Breach to be Clear
Damages were to be awarded against a Local Authority for breach of statutory duty in a care case only if the statute was clear that damages were capable of being awarded. in the ordinary case a breach of statutory duty does not, by itself, give rise . .
Applied – 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 – Boyle v Wisman 1855
After parties were enabled to testify in most civil cases by the 1851, the court recognised that the failure of one of them to deny a fact which it is in his power to deny gives colour to the evidence against him. . .
Cited – McQueen v Great Western Rly Co CA 1875
If a prima facie case is made out capable of being displaced, and if the party against whom it is established might by calling particular witnesses and producing particular evidence displace that prima facie case, and he omits to adduce that . .
Cited – Blamire v South Cumbria Health Authority CA 1993
When assessing damages for losses arising through professional negligence by a school, the court arrived at a lump sum representing the loss of the opportunity to gain employment at the end of a successful period of education. The onus of proving . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Education

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168530

In re Claims Direct Test Cases: CA 19 Mar 2002

The applicants sought to appeal on two matters where they had questions of practice in the conduct of personal injury claims. These were as to whether after-the-event cover purchased under section 29 amounted to insurance premiums, and the setting of how much was a reasonable sum to be recovered in such cases.
Held: The Court of Appeal could only answer appeals from judgements. Its jurisdiction is appellate, and it was not appropriate to seek to deal with matters which had not yet been decided at first instance.

Judges:

Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Master of the Rolls, Lord Justice Potter and Lady Justice Arden

Citations:

Times 04-Apr-2002, Gazette 03-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 333

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Access to Justice Act 1999 29

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Street v Mountford HL 6-Mar-1985
When a licence is really a tenancy
The document signed by the occupier stated that she understood that she had been given a licence, and that she understood that she had not been granted a tenancy protected under the Rent Acts. Exclusive occupation was in fact granted.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Costs, Insurance, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.168119

Volex Group Plc v Jane Wilson Evans: CA 27 Feb 2002

The claimant sought damages after she breathed noxious fumes at her place of work. It was said that she had been told that she could leave her machine to get fresh air as she wished, but the judge had found that she had not appreciated that this was intended to mean that she need not face the fumes at all.
Held: The nature of the fumes had not been established, and the cause of the illness had not been established. Accordingly the liability of the employers could not be established. The employer’s appeal was allowed.

Judges:

Lord Justice Schiemann Lord Justice Chadwick And Sir Christopher Staughton

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 225

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167960

Lowe v Guise: CA 26 Feb 2002

The claimant had care of his severely disabled brother. Following the accident he was unable to give the same level of care, though he continued to receive the care allowance.
Held: An injured claimant who worked, albeit gratuitously, for his family suffered the loss of being able to contribute the value of his service to the needs of his family. That loss was genuine and sounded in damages. To allow otherwise would be to make the loss of an ability to garden measurable in damages but not the ability to care for a family member.

Judges:

Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Rix and Mr Justice Morland

Citations:

Times 25-Mar-2002, Gazette 11-Apr-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 197

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Benefits, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167956

Ace Insurance Sa-Nv v Surendranath Seechurn: CA 6 Feb 2002

The claimant sought payment under an insurance policy for his permanent disability. The judge had found that the defendant insurers had indicated a readiness to continue negotiations beyond the limitation period, and that they would apply for a stay if proceedings were issued whilst negotiations were under way. The insurers later claimed that his claim was out of time. He asserted that they were estopped from making that assertion. The insurance company appealed a finding against them.
Held: An estoppel would require a clear promise with specific regard to the limitation period. It was unnecessary to explore the several different forms of estoppel. Hughes was to apply. There was to be shown a clear representation. It must be precise and unambiguous. The claimants interpretation of what was happening did not affect the objective view of the words used. The offer made was conditional upon the claimant submitting to further examination in any event, which he had not done. No estoppel was established.

Judges:

Lord Justice Ward Lord Justice Thorpe And Lord Justice Keene

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 67, [2002] 2 Lloyds LR 390

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Hughes v Metropolitan Railway Co HL 1877
A notice to repair had been served by the landlord on the tenant. The tenant wrote offering to buy the premises and proposed deferring the commencement of repairs until the landlord responded. The landlord replied by letter asking the price. It was . .
Cited – Republic of India and Another v India Steamship Co Ltd (Indian Endurance and Indian Grace) (No 2) HL 23-Oct-1997
When a action in rem against a ship was in fact parallel to an action in personam begun in India and awaiting a decision; an action was not to be allowed here.
Lord Steyn: ‘It is settled that an estoppel by convention may arise where parties to . .

Cited by:

Cited – Super Chem Products Limited v American Life and General Insurance Company Limited and Others PC 12-Jan-2004
PC (Trinidad and Tobago) A fire occurred at premises in which the stock was insured under two policies. Both insurers denied the claims alleging arson, and that it was out of time. The claimant said that the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Personal Injury, Insurance, Estoppel

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167920

Roerig v Valiant Trawlers Ltd: CA 28 Jan 2002

The claimant who was Dutch, was a widow of a fisherman who had died at sea. The question on appeal was ‘in assessing damages for loss of dependency should benefits resulting from the loss be deducted from the damages?’ The claimant’s position under Dutch law was different, with all benefits deducted from any compensation awarded.
Held: The accident occurred on an English registered trawler, and the applicable law was English as to liability but possibly Dutch as to damages. If the 1976 Act was procedural rather than substantive, the law applicable would be English, and the Dutch law as to deduction of all benefits would not apply. Traditionally, issues as to the quantification of damages have been seen as procedural rather than substantive. The general structure of the Act also suggested that it was intended to offer English remedies, and those should be applied: ‘the general rule is not to be dislodged easily’.
After referring to the case of Boys v Chaplin, Waller LJ said: ‘The passages referred to support the view that so far as damages are concerned it is a question for the substantive law whether a head of damage is recoverable, but quantification of the actual head is procedural. If one poses the question whether the issue in this case is about the right to recover certain benefits or whether it is about the quantification of the damages for loss of dependency the answer seems to me to be that it is about the quantification of the damages. The concern of the court in considering a tortious claim should be as to liability, including liability for particular heads of damage without the existence of which liability might not be complete. The question whether deductions should be made for benefits is not a question which goes to liability: it is a question going to assessment’ and ‘Procedurally an action on behalf of a person killed in an accident is only available in the English courts by virtue of what is now sections 1 and 2 of the 1976 Act . . As I have already said, we are concerned with an action which can only be brought in this country by virtue of the 1976 Act.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown Vice-President Of The Court Of Appeal Civil Division, Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Sedley

Citations:

[2002] All ER (D) 234, [2002] EWCA Civ 21, [2002] 1 WLR 2304

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1976 4, Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 11, Merchant Shipping Act 1995 25

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Coupland v Arabian Gulf Oil Co QBD 1983
The plaintiff employee, injured whilst working for the defendant in Libya, sued in contract and tort. The judge held that Libyan law was the proper law of the contract, but that this was of no relevance to the claim in tort which could proceed here . .
Approved – Stevens v Head 18-Mar-1993
(High Court of Australia) The court considered a claim for damages arising out of a motor accident in New South Wales, where the claim had been brought in the courts of Queensland. The questions arose as to whether or not a provision in the Motor . .
Cited – Boys v Chaplin HL 1969
The plaintiff sued in England for a traffic accident which had happened in Malta. The law of Malta would have denied certain elements of damages which would be available in this jurisdiction.
Held: Liability in respect of the road accident in . .
Cited – Edmunds v Simmonds QBD 4-Oct-2000
The claimant suffered damages in a road traffic accident in Spain caused by the respondent. A Spanish court would have allowed much lower damages. Such damages should normally be assessed in accordance with the law of the country where the accident . .
Cited – Caltex Singapore Pte Ltd v BP Shipping Ltd 1996
A provision of Singapore law giving a ship-owner the right to limit his liability for damage resulting from a collision in Singapore was procedural, or at least not substantive. The limitation in question did not qualify the right of the claimants . .
Cited – Breavington v Godleman 18-Aug-1988
Austlii (High Court of Australia) – Private International Law – Tort – Negligence – Act committed in Territory – Personal injury – Territory statute imposing limit on amount of damages – Action in State court – . .
Cited – Breavington v Godleman 18-Aug-1988
Austlii (High Court of Australia) – Private International Law – Tort – Negligence – Act committed in Territory – Personal injury – Territory statute imposing limit on amount of damages – Action in State court – . .
Cited – The Esso Malaysia 1974
A Russian seaman died as the result of a collision in international waters between two foreign registered vessels. His family sought to claim here.
Held: The benefit of the Fatal Accidents Acts can, in principle, be claimed by a foreigner. The . .
Cited – White v Brunton CA 1984
A judgment given upon a trial of a preliminary issue was held to be a final judgment for the purpose of deciding whether leave to appeal was required on the ground that it could be treated as the first part of a final hearing. Sir John Donaldson MR . .
Cited – Holmes v Bangladesh Binan Corporation 1988
An appeal was sought from a judge’s order deciding a preliminary issue of law. The claimant sought damages under the Fatal Accidents Act case.
Held: Bingham LJ said: ‘Order 33, r. 3 gives the Court a wide discretion to order the separate trial . .
Cited – Tanfern Ltd v Cameron-MacDonald, Cameron-MacDonald CA 12-May-2000
The court gave detailed guidance on the application of the new procedures on civil appeals in private law cases introduced on May 2. Appeals from a County Court District Judge’s final decision in a multi-track case could now go straight to the Court . .

Cited by:

Cited – Harding v Wealands CA 17-Dec-2004
The claimant sought damages here for a road traffic accident which had occurred in Australia. The defendant was working in England. The defendant argued that the law of New South Wales applied.
Held: The general rule in section 11 was not to . .
Cited – Al-Jedda v Secretary of State for Defence CA 29-Mar-2006
The applicant had dual Iraqi and British nationality. He was detained by British Forces in Iraq under suspicion of terrorism, and interned.
Held: His appeal failed. The UN resolution took priority over the European Convention on Human Rights . .
Cited – Harding v Wealands HL 5-Jul-2006
Claim in UK for Accident in Australia
The claimant had been a passenger in a car driven by his now partner. They had an accident in New South Wales. The car was insured in Australia. He sought leave to sue in England and Wales because Australian law would limit the damages.
Held: . .
Cited – In the Matter of T and N Limited and others ChD 12-Apr-2006
. .
Cited – Bristow Helicopters Ltd and Another v Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (Incorporated In and Under Laws of Delaware USA) and others ComC 5-Mar-2004
. .
Cited – Welsh Ambulance Services NHS Trust and Another v Williams CA 15-Feb-2008
The court considered the essential philosophy underwriting the 1976 Act. Smith LJ said: ‘nothing that a dependant (or for that matter anyone else) could do after death could either increase or decrease the dependency. The dependency is fixed at the . .
Cited – Saldanha v Fulton Navigation Inc AdCt 10-May-2011
. .
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 – 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 and Another QBD 28-Oct-2011
The deceased died in a road traffic accident whilst serving in the Armed forces in Germany. The driver was insured under German law. The widow now claimed damages in England. She had entered a new relationship.
Held: The object of section 844 . .
Cited – Cox v Ergo Versicherung Ag SC 2-Apr-2014
The deceased army officer serving in Germany died while cycling when hit by a driver insured under German law. His widow, the claimant, being domiciled in England brought her action here, claiming for bereavement and loss of dependency. The Court . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury, International

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167900

Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust: CA 14 Feb 2002

A disabled mother sought damages for the birth of a child after a negligently performed sterilisation.
Held: The rule in McFarlane against recovery of damages for the birth of a healthy child, did not prevent an award which was intended to reflect the particular damages attributable to the difficulties of providing care with her disabilities.

Judges:

Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Robert Walker, And, Lady Justice Hale

Citations:

Times 20-Feb-2002, Gazette 21-Mar-2002, [2002] EWCA Civ 88, [2003] QB 20

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 by:

Cited – A v East Kent Community NHS Trust CA 17-Dec-2002
The claimant had become pregnant whilst placed in a mixed psychiatric ward. She claimed damages for their negligence. They responded that damages were not payable for a healthy child.
Held: The court was bound by Rees, and damages were not to . .
Appeal from – Rees v Darlington Memorial Hospital NHS Trust HL 16-Oct-2003
The claimant was disabled, and sought sterilisation because she feared the additional difficulties she would face as a mother. The sterilisation failed. She sought damages.
Held: The House having considered the issue in MacFarlane only . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167610

Kerr v North Ayrshire Council: SCS 16 Jan 2002

The claimant sought damages for personal injuries after injuring her back at work as a caretaker. She alleged a failure to provide a safe system of work. She was asked to move folding tables weighing up to 30lbs. They were to be stored vertically. She hurt her back lifting one from the vertical to a horizontal axis. No training had been given in how the tables were to be moved.
Held: A breach of the duty to make an assessment does not in itself gives rise to liability in damages. The steps proposed to reduce the risk were not practicable in the circumstances, and the claim failed.

Judges:

Lady Smith

Citations:

[2002] ScotCS 13

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 (1992 No 2793)

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167453

Matthews v The Ministry of Defence: QBD 22 Jan 2002

The claimant sought damages for asbestos related diseases, incurred whilst working as an engineer in the Royal Navy. He claimed that the bar on claiming against the Crown infringed his rights to a remedy. The 1987 Act removed the bar to a claim, but not retrospectively. Section 10 of the 1947 Act created a new immunity. Actions against a State are not barred in limine. The Secretary of State may allow an action to proceed, but has the right to prevent an action. Some claims made by persons employed by the State have not been treated as involving the determination of civil rights. The Pellegrin case had now set the test for determining whether an action involved the determination of civil rights, and the test involved looking at the nature of the duties undertaken. The claim also had to relate to et applicant’s conditions of service. This is a claim in tort. Despite the existence of an alternative means of compensation, the clause failed the proportionality test. It is not possible to read the Act in a way which would make it compatible with the Convention, and a declaration of incompatibility was made.

Judges:

The Honourable Mr Justice Keith

Citations:

Times 30-Jan-2002, [2002] EWHC 13 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Crown Proceedings Act 1947 10, European Convention on Human Rights 6(1) 2(1), Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987

Citing:

Cited – Pellegrin v France ECHR 8-Dec-1999
The court modified the approach taken in earlier decisions, that there are excluded from the scope of article 6(1) disputes raised by public servants whose duties typify the specific activities of the public service in so far as the latter is acting . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Matthews v Ministry of Defence CA 29-May-2002
The Ministry appealed against a finding that the Act, which deprived the right of a Crown employee to sue for personal injuries, was an infringement of his human rights.
Held: The restriction imposed by the section was not a procedural . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Armed Forces, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167423

YAH v Medway NHS Foundation Trust: QBD 5 Nov 2018

The Claimant claimed damages for psychiatric injuries associated with her daughters birth.
The Defendant resists this claim and argues that the Claimant is not entitled to recover damages for psychiatric injury.

Judges:

Mrs Justice Whipple

Citations:

[2018] EWHC 2964 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Professional Negligence, Personal injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.628232

Sayers and Others v Smith Kline Beecham plc and Others; X, Y, Z and Others v Schering Health Care Ltd and Others; Afrika and Others v Cape plc: CA 21 Dec 2001

The case concerned the management of substantial multi-party actions, and in particular the form of costs orders. The claimants sought a payment of the ‘common costs’ element to be made payable as the appropriate relative common issues were resolved.
Held: The purpose of the new rules was to clarify the sharing of the burden of costs, not to prescribe what orders should be made and when. As to discontinuing claimants, the current form of order should continue. The advantages of amending such orders to crystallise the costs of a discontinuing party were outweighed by the potential injustice.

Judges:

Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Buxton, And, Lord Justice Longmore

Citations:

Times 15-Jan-2002, Gazette 06-Mar-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 2017

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules Part 19 Section III

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Afrika and others v Cape Plc and others; X Y Z and Others v Schering health Care Ltd; Sayers and Others v Merck, Smithkline Beecham plc MMR/MR vaccine litigation CA 21-Dec-2001
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries after immunisation with the MMR vaccine. . .

Cited by:

See Also – XYZ and others v Schering Health QBD 29-Jul-2002
The court heard seven lead claims in group litigation against three drug companies in respect of their combined oral contraceptive products. . .
See Also – XYZ v Schering Health Care: Oral Contraceptive Litigation SCCO 31-Mar-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167306

Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others, Dyson and Another v Leeds City Counci: CA 11 Dec 2001

Where a claimant suffered mesothelioma, contracted whilst working with asbestos, but the disease may have been contracted from inhalation at different times, and with different employers, his claim must fail since it was not possible to identify which employer was in fact responsible so as to allow the court to apportion liability. The disease arose after a single cell was affected. 90% of mesothelioma was contracted following exposure to asbestos. The law should not be distorted to assist in a hard case. Section 2(2) of the 1957 Act related to ‘occupancy’, not ‘activity’ liability. The court drew a clear distinction between the occupancy duties and the activity duties of an occupier. The 1957 Act was concerned only to replace the old common law rules relating to the occupancy duties of an occupier. Where the complaint arose from dust created by contractor’s activities, the occupier owed no common law duties of occupancy to the claimant.

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Latham, And, Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

[2002] ICR 412, [2002] IRLR 129, [2002] PIQR P27, Times 13-Dec-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 1881, [2002] 1 WLR 1052

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 2(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 – Saggar v Ministry of Defence EAT 25-May-2004
Three Defence employees sought to bring claims of variously race and sex discrimination against the Ministry. In each case their services were provided almost entirely abroad, and the defendant argued that there was no jurisdiction to hear the case, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.166980

Hewison v Meridian Shipping Services Pte Ltd, Coflexip Stena Offshore Ltd, Flex Installer Offshore Ltd: QBD 30 Nov 2001

The applicant had been severely injured at work. He was an epileptic, and had not disclosed his condition to his employers, who because of the safety aspects of the work on oil rigs could not have employed him if he had disclosed the sickness. The employers resisted payment of damages for loss of earnings and congenial employment.
Held: The losses flowed from his inability to continue working because of his epilepsy, not his injury. He had committed criminal offences under the Theft Act in making statements to continue his employment. The safety critical context of his work was important, and public policy required a declaration that he was not entitled to any loss of earnings claim as a seaman nor to damages for loss of his congenial sea-going career.

Judges:

Mr Justice Morland

Citations:

[2001] EWHC QB 450

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Cited – Hunter v Butler CA 28-Dec-1995
There could be no Fatal Accidents Acts damages for a loss of ‘moonlighting’ earnings dependency. . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Hewison v Meridian Shipping Pte, Coflexip Stena Offshore Ltd, Flex Installer Offshore Ltd CA 11-Dec-2002
The claimant was awarded damages for injuries suffered in his work as a seaman. The respondents claimed that he should not receive damages, since he had made false declarations as to his health in order to obtain employment, hiding his epilepsy . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.166952

Goode v Martin: CA 13 Dec 2001

The claimant had sought to amend her claim for damages for personal injuries. The application had been rejected as introducing a claim not based on the same facts. She had suffered severe head injuries, and had no memory of the accident. She served a statement of claim based upon the defendant’s statement. The defendants defence asserted a different version of the events.
Held: The Human Rights Act and the CPR gave the courts power to ensure that parties were given a fair trial. Rule 17.4(2) had been interpreted narrowly so as to disallow amendments arising from facts put in issue by the defendant. Section 3 HRA however now gave the courts power which would allow justice to be provided. The rule was not based on any sound reason of public policy. The court should interpret rule 17.4(2) to let the court allow the amendment if the same facts: ‘The court may allow an amendment whose effect will be to add . . a new claim, but only if the new claim arises out of the same facts or substantially the same facts as are already in issue on a claim in respect of which the party applying for permission has already claimed a remedy in the proceedings.’

Judges:

Lord Justice Brooke, Lord Justice Latham, And, Lord Justice Kay

Citations:

Times 24-Jan-2002, [2001] EWCA Civ 1899, [2001] 3 All ER 562, [2002] 1 WLR 1828

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights Art 6, Human Rights Act 1998 3(1), Civil Procedure Rules 1.2(b) 17.4(2)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Regina v A (Complainant’s Sexual History) (No 2) HL 17-May-2001
The fact of previous consensual sex between complainant and defendant could be relevant in a trial of rape, and a refusal to allow such evidence could amount to a denial of a fair trial to a defendant. Accordingly, where the evidence was so relevant . .

Cited by:

Cited – Savings and Investment Bank Ltd (in Liquidation) v Fincken CA 6-Nov-2001
When the court was asked to decide whether a proposed form of amendment to the pleadings would add an issue which was out of time, the court must look to the pleadings before and after the proposed amendment, and the factual issues which would have . .
Cited – Coudert Brothers v Normans Bay Limited (Formerly Illingworth, Morris Limited) CA 27-Feb-2004
The respondent had lost its investment in a Russian development, and the appellants challenged a finding that they had been negligent in their advice with regard to the offer documents.
Held: As to the basis of calculation of damages as to a . .
Cited – Estate Acquisition and Development Ltd v Wiltshire and Another CA 4-May-2006
The defendants appealed a decision that they had no sufficient reason for not attending court on the day of the trial.
Held: The fact that the defendants had a continuing commercial relationship with the claimants was not enough to justify an . .
Cited – Rhone-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and Another v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd ChD 16-Feb-2006
The patent application had been presented to the European Patent Office and granted only after 13 years. The claimant now appealed refusal to allow amendment of its claim to allow a claim in its sole name. The defendant argued that it was out of . .
Cited – Charles Church Developments Ltd v Stent Foundations Ltd and Another TCC 5-Dec-2006
The land owner sought damages for negligence against its builder and a sub-contractor. Having left the issue too late to complete the pre-action protocol, it issued proceedings, but then had to seek to amend the pleadings to add a further claim out . .
Cited – Berezovsky v Abramovich ComC 22-May-2008
Applications were made to amend pleadings and for consequential orders. The claimant sought damages of $4.3 billion alleging breach of trust. The claimant sought to add claims which the defendant said were out of time.
Held: The proposed . .
Cited – S v Suren and Another QBD 10-Sep-2004
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Human Rights, Personal Injury, Civil Procedure Rules

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.167061

Najib v John Laing Plc: QBD 19 Apr 2011

‘The claimant seeks damages for personal injury, loss and damage arising from the negligent exposure to asbestos during the course of his employment as a joiner with the defendant between 1974 and 1980. As a result, the claimant has contracted malignant mesothelioma. Judgment has been entered for the claimant, damages now fall to be assessed.’

Judges:

Nicola Davies DBE J

Citations:

[2011] EWHC 1016 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 05 June 2022; Ref: scu.432863

Godwin v Swindon Borough Council: CA 10 Oct 2001

The claimant appealed against an order striking out his claim for personal injuries. The claim had been issued in time, but not served. An extension of time was granted, and the notice sent by first class post the day before that period expired. The defendant had claimed that the rules deemed service on the second day after posting, and therefore the day after expiry of the extension of time. In this case they had in fact received the notice on that last day. Did the deeming provision override the facts?
Held: The provision should be read to allow for contrary evidence. The appeal was allowed. CPR 6.9 cannot be invoked to dispense with service ‘when what would be done is in substance that which CPR 7.6(3) forbids.’
May LJ described Practice Directions as ‘subordinate to the rules’ and as ‘at best a weak aid to the interpretation of the rules themselves.’
CPR Part 6 contains general rules about service of documents and does not only apply to service of a claim form.

Judges:

Lord Justice Pill, Lord Justice May And Mr Justice Rimer

Citations:

[2002] 1 WLR 997, [2001] 4 All ER 641, [2001] EWCA Civ 1478

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Civil Procedure Rules 6.7(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Elmes v Hygrade Food Products Plc CA 24-Jan-2001
Where a claim form is served in time but is incorrectly served (in this case on the defendants’ insurers instead of on the defendants themselves), there is no power in the court under CPR 3.10(b) (remedy of errors of procedure) or CPR 6.8 (service . .

Cited by:

Cited – Consignia Plc v Russell Sealy CA 19-Jun-2002
The complainant was a post office employee. He brought a claim for unfair dismissal, but he posted it at a time when in the normal course of delivery, it would not arrive. He claimed to be unaware of the normal times for delivery.
Held: It was . .
Affirmed – Anderton v Clwyd County Council (No 2); Bryant v Pech and Another Dorgan v Home Office; Chambers v Southern Domestic Electrical Services Ltd; Cummins v Shell International Manning Services Ltd CA 3-Jul-2002
In each case, the applicant sought to argue that documents which had actually been received on a certain date should not be deemed to have been served on a different day because of the rule.
Held: The coming into force of the Human Rights Act . .
Cited – Wilkey and Another v British Broadcasting Corporation and Another CA 22-Oct-2002
The applicant’s claim had been dismissed for late service. The defendant had in fact received the documents, but the service appeared deemed to be out of time. The subsequent decisions of Anderton and Godwin meant that the judge’s reasoning no . .
Cited – Cranfield and Another v Bridgegrove Ltd; Claussen v Yeates etc CA 14-May-2003
In each case claims had been late in being served and extensions in time were sought and refused.
Held: The recent authorities were examined. The words ‘has been unable to serve’ in CPR 7.6(3)(a) include all cases where the court has failed to . .
Cited – Cranfield and Another v Bridgegrove Ltd; Claussen v Yeates etc CA 14-May-2003
In each case claims had been late in being served and extensions in time were sought and refused.
Held: The recent authorities were examined. The words ‘has been unable to serve’ in CPR 7.6(3)(a) include all cases where the court has failed to . .
Cited – Margaret Brennan v Bolt Burdon, London Borough of Islington, Leigh Day and Co QBD 30-Oct-2003
The claimant had sought relief for the injury to her health suffered by condition of her flat. The legal advisers had settled the matter, thinking that the claim had not been timeously served. The defendant appealed an order that the compromise was . .
Cited – Basil Shiblaq v Kahraman Sadikoglu (No 2) ComC 30-Jul-2004
The court considered whether there had been effective service of proceedings on defendants in Turkey. Evidence was given as to the effectiveness of such service in Turkish law.
Held: The defendant’s application to set aside the judgment in . .
Cited – Brennan v Bolt Burdon and Others, London Borough of Islington, Leigh Day and Co CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant sought damages for injury alleged to have been suffered as tenant of a house after being subjected to carbon monoxide poisoning, and also from her former solicitors for their delay in her claim. The effective question was whether the . .
Cited – Asia Pacific (Hk) Ltd. and others v Hanjin Shipping Co Ltd (Hanjin Pennsylvania) ComC 7-Nov-2005
Various cargo owners sought damages against the owners of the ship which had suffered an explosion with the loss of the cargo. The defendants asserted limitation. Some claimants had agreed an extension of time. Proceedings were then issued but . .
Cited – Floyd and Another v Legal Services Commission QBD 28-Apr-2010
The claimant had succeeded in an action against her legally aided opponent, but then delayed in making her claim for costs against the respondent. The costs judge said that the CPR did not apply, and that he had no discretion to extend the time . .
Cited – Aktas v Adepta CA 22-Oct-2010
The court was asked whether, when a claim was issued towards the very end of a limitation period, but was then not served, and the claim was struck out, CPR Part 7.5(1) gave a further four months in which it could be resurrected at the discretion of . .
Cited – Kamali v City and Country Properties Ltd CA 24-Jul-2006
The defendant tenant appealed against judgment saying that the proceedings in the County Court had not been correctly served. Though the documents had been sent to his address under the lease, he had been out of the jurisdiction when the claim was . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Limitation, Civil Procedure Rules, Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.166544

Priestley v Fowler: 1837

Priestley was a butcher’s man who was injured when a van overloaded by fellow employees collapsed, injuring him. His lawsuit was founded on the principle of a master’s vicarious liability for his servant’s negligence.

Citations:

[1837] EngR 202, (1837) 3 M and W 1, (1837) 150 ER 1030

Links:

Commonlii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Personal Injury, Vicarious Liability

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.313319

Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board: IHCS 9 Feb 2000

The petitioner appealed a refusal of his claim for compensation. He was a serving police officer injured whilst arresting an offender. He had retired on medical grounds and received pensions, which the Board found deductible from any award reducing his claim below the minimum. The relative scheme sought to award damages on a basis comparable to common law.
Held: Paragraph 20 provided that compensation was to be reduced by any pension received but paragraph 19 said reductions were not to be made for the receipt of money paid because the claimant had purchased that benefit. Parry was not comparable because there was the board was not in the position of a tortfeasor. An alteration in the Scheme intended to limit compensation to avoid providing the Applicant with an income higher than that which he would otherwise have enjoyed, should not be interpreted to mean that throughout the period after the date of his normal retirement he should benefit to the tune of one half of his ill-health pension. The effect of section 10 is that no deduction fell to be made in respect of the petitioner’s pension for the period after his normal retirement date. This result was inequitable.

Judges:

Lord Coulsfield and Lord Cowie and Lord President

Citations:

[2000] ScotCS 36

Links:

Bailii, ScotC

Statutes:

Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 19 20, Administration of Justice Act 1982 10

Citing:

Appealed to – Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board HL 5-Jul-2001
When calculating the losses suffered by a victim of crime, the allowance to be made for losses to a retirement pension through having to retire early should have set off against them, the benefits received by way of payments for his ill-health, . .
Cited – Parry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .
Cited – Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte Webb CA 1987
Interpretation of CICB Scheme
The court should not construe the scheme as if it were a statute but as a public announcement of what the Government was willing to do. This entails the court deciding what would be a reasonable and literate man’s understanding of the circumstances . .
Cited – Regina v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board ex parte Staten 1972
The words of the scheme should be given ‘their ordinary sensible meaning’ . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Cantwell v Criminal Injuries Compensation Board HL 5-Jul-2001
When calculating the losses suffered by a victim of crime, the allowance to be made for losses to a retirement pension through having to retire early should have set off against them, the benefits received by way of payments for his ill-health, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 June 2022; Ref: scu.163776

Walkley v Precision Forgings Ltd: CA 1978

The plaintiff appealed the strict application of the limitation laws against his claim. He had been injured whilst working as a grinder. He began one claim which lapsed, and began a second claim outside the limitation period, requesting the court to use its discretion to extend the period so as to allow the second action.
Held: Even if the first action could and would have been struck out for want of prosecution, Mr Walkley was entitled to seek an extension under section 2D in the second action and it was not possible to conclude on the material before the court that his application was bound to fail. (Waller LJ dissenting in part)

Judges:

Megaw LJ, Shaw LJJ, Waller LJ

Citations:

[1978] 1 WLR 1228

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Appeal from – 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 – 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 . .
Cited – Seal v Chief Constable of South Wales Police HL 4-Jul-2007
The claimant had sought to bring proceedings against the respondent, but as a mental patient subject to the 1983 Act, had been obliged by the section first to obtain consent. The parties disputed whether the failure was a procedural or substantial . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.242524

Candolin Ea (Approximation Of Laws): ECJ 30 Jun 2005

Compulsory motor vehicle insurance – Directives 84/5/EEC and 90/232/EEC – Rules on civil liability – Passenger’s contribution to the loss or injury – Refusal or limitation of the right to compensation.
The drunken owner of a car allowed an uninsured but also drunken friend to drive it. The insurer sought to escape payment for his injuries.
Held: ‘The owner of the car who was travelling in the car as a passenger cannot therefore be treated more severely than the other passengers on the ground that he permitted his car to be driven by someone who was acting under the influence of alcohol.’

Citations:

C-537/03, [2005] EUECJ C-537/03

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

European

Cited by:

Cited – Churchill Insurance Company Ltd v Wilkinson and Others CA 19-May-2010
The various insured defendants had been driven in the insured vehicles by a non-insured driver. Suffering injury at the negligence of the driver, they recovered variously damages. Their insurance companies sought recovery of the sums paid from their . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages, Road Traffic

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.228055

Cashmore v Blue Circle Plumbing Fixtures Ltd: CA 30 Jul 1996

Time did not run for the purposes of CCR Order 9 Rule 10 during a period when the action was stayed pursuant to an order for a stay made under CCR Order 6 Rule 1(6) pending the filing of a medical report in support of a claim for damages for personal injuries.
Held: In an action where automatic directions have never been triggered at the time a stay is ordered, and where the lifting of the stay leads to the delivery of defences by all the defendants (or an order is made to the effect that invalid defences may stand as valid defences without redelivery), automatic directions will then run from the appropriate trigger date in the usual way.

Judges:

Waller LJ

Citations:

Unreported, CAT 30th July 1996

Statutes:

County Court Rules 1981 6.1(6) 9.10

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Cockeril v Tambrands Limited CA 21-May-1998
Even if a case is quite unsuitable for automatic directions, the plaintiff has an obligation to apply instead for specific manual directions to stand in their stead. It would be wrong to allow a plaintiff to escape from the discipline of the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Litigation Practice, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 June 2022; Ref: scu.184382

Back v Dick, Kerr, and Co: HL 15 May 1906

A firm of contractors who were engaged in substituting electric for horse tramway lines in the streets of a town stored the new rails when unloaded from the railway trucks in the railway company’s yard by arrangement with the railway company. An employee of the contractors was injured while stacking the rails. The yard abutted upon a street through which the electric tramway would ultimately run, but at the time of the accident operations had not extended beyond a point distant over a quarter of a mile from the yard.
Held ( aff. the judgment of the Court of Appeal, diss. Lord Loreburn, L.C., and Lord James of Hereford) that the injured man was not at the time of the accident employed on or in or about an engineering work within the meaning of section 7 of the Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897.

Judges:

the Lord Chancellor (Loreburn), Lords Davey, James of Hereford, Robertson, and Atkinson

Citations:

[1906] UKHL 884

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Workmen’s Compensation Act 1897 7

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Employment

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.625458

Knauer v Ministry of Justice: QBD 24 Jul 2014

The deceased died of mesothelioma after working for the defendant as an administrative assistant in buildings constructed using asbestos.

Judges:

Bean J

Citations:

[2014] EWHC 2553 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.535391

International Energy Group Ltd v Zurich Insurance Plc UK: ComC 24 Jan 2012

The defendant insurance company was found liable to contribute under insurance it had written, 22% of the compensation it had paid out in a mesothelioma claim brought in Guernsey by a Mr le Carre. The company was successor to a company which had employed Mr le Carre for many years, exposing him to asbestos. Other insurance companies had contributed according to the extent of time covered. The court considered the applicability of the special rule as to evidence introduced in the Fairchild case as modfied by the 2006 Act. However that Act did not apply in Guernsey, and the court was left with the position at common law (agreed to be the same in the UK and in Guernsey) as found in Barker.
Held: The court accepted Zurich’s case regarding the compensation, but not the defence costs, paid in respect of Mr Carre. It was liable to pay andpound;71,729.84 in full discharge of its policy liabilities, being its relevant proportion of such compensation plus 100% of the defence costs.
‘the basis of Common Law liability prevails, in accordance with the principles enunciated in Barker, with the result that the liability of any defendant for mesothelioma is assessed by reference to the responsibility he bears for exposure, as compared with the responsibility for other exposures to asbestos and the risk of contracting mesothelioma. The Insured here accepts, ex hypothesi, that exposure over any period of one year is quite sufficient to give rise to a material increase in the risk of contracting mesothelioma and, given the agreed facts as to the uniformity and consistency of the intensity of exposure over the whole of the period of the Insured’s employment, the only measure of assessing responsibility for exposure is by reference to periods of time during which such exposure occurred. It cannot matter for this purpose, when assessing the Insured’s liability for any one year of exposure, conforming to the annual period of the insurance cover granted by the Insurer, that there is only one employer here involved. ‘

Judges:

Cooke J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 69 (Comm)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Compensation Act 2006

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Phillips (Widow and Executrix of the Estate of Arthur Phillips, Deceased) v Syndicate 992 Gunner and others QBD 14-May-2003
Mr Phillips had been employed by a single employer between 1955 and 1957 and then between 1959 and 1970, during which periods he was exposed to asbestos dust. Out of the 13 years of this exposure, the insurers were on risk for 9 years between 1959 . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – International Energy Group Ltd v Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch CA 6-Feb-2013
. .
At First Instance – Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch v International Energy Group Ltd SC 20-May-2015
A claim had been made for mesothelioma following exposure to asbestos, but the claim arose in Guernsey. Acknowledging the acute difficultis particular to the evidence in such cases, the House of Lords, in Fairchild. had introduced the Special Rule . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Insurance

Updated: 02 June 2022; Ref: scu.450480

Kane v New Forest District Council: CA 13 Jun 2001

A pedestrian walked from a footpath into the road and was hit by a car. She sought damages from the highway authority, saying that they had allowed vegetation to grow to an extent to make it impossible to be seen. As a second tier appeal, the claimant had to demonstrate a real as opposed to a merely fanciful prospect of success.
Held: The authority had foreseen the dangers when granting permission for the development, but had failed to ensure that the sight lines were improved before the development was completed. ‘the starting point must surely be that the defendants did create the source of danger. They it was who required this footpath to be constructed. I cannot accept that in these circumstances they were entitled to wash their hands of that danger and simply leave it to others to cure it by improving the sightlines. It is one thing to say that at the time when the defendants required the construction of this footpath they had every reason to suppose that the improvements along The White Cottage frontage would ultimately allow it to be safely opened and used: quite another to say that they were later entitled to stand idly by whilst, as they must have known, the footpath lay open to the public in a recognisably dangerous state.’ The appellant’s case did not merely have a realistic prospect of success, she had a good case. The authority had also failed ti use its Highways Act powers to have the sight line improved.

Judges:

Lord Justice Simon Brown, Mr Justice Dyson, Lord Justice May

Citations:

[2002] 1 WLR 312, [2001] EWCA Civ 878, [2002] LTL 12 April 2002

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Highways Act 1980 154(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 – 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 – Swain v Hillman CA 21-Oct-1999
Strike out – Realistic Not Fanciful Chance Needed
The proper test for whether an action should be struck out under the new Rules was whether it had a realistic as opposed to a fanciful prospect of success. There was no justification for further attempts to explain the meaning of what are clear . .
Cited – Strable v Dartford Borough Council CA 1984
A local authority is not liable in damages for a negligent failure properly to complete its planning law duties. No action lay and the remedy available to an individual in such a case is to object on appeal to the Secretary of State and, if still . .
Cited – Dunlop v Woolahara Municipal Council PC 1981
A council had no liabiity in a private action for damages for a breach of statutory duty in its handling of a planning application. While doubting that it was so, Lord Diplock left open the question whether an individual injuriously affected by . .

Cited by:

Cited – Great North Eastern Railway Limited v Hart and Secretary of State for Transport, Local Government and the Regions and Network Rail Infrastructure Limited QBD 30-Oct-2003
A driver had crashed through a barrier before a bridge, and descended into the path of a train. Ten people died. He now sought a contribution order against the Secretary of State for the condition of the barrier which was said to be faulty.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.160097

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 liability could be imposed, and no fault provisions of the Convention were of no assistance because of the wording.

Judges:

Henry LJ, Longmore LJ, Carnwath LJ

Citations:

Times 06-Aug-2001, [2001] EWCA Civ 947

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Package Travel Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992 (1992 No 3288) 15(2), Warsaw Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules regarding International Air Transport 1929 Art 17 Art 18Art19

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

Personal Injury

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.159494

Spittle v Bunney: CA 1988

The plaintiff made a claim in damages for the loss of her mother’s services.
Held: In assessing a FAA claim on behalf of a child a judge, directing himself as he would a jury, was, in valuing the mothers services to take into account the change in nature of a mother’s services as the child grew older and that while the yardstick of a nanny’s wage could be used in respect of the early years of a child’s life it became less appropriate as the child got older: ‘The judge adopted the ‘nanny’ formula. Figures were provided of the wage which a commercially hired nanny could have expected to receive ‘net in-hand’ each week. By ‘net in-hand’ was meant the sum actually receivable by the nanny after she had paid her tax and NI contributions. — The judge did not accede to a submission made on behalf of the plaintiffs that the ‘net in-hand’ figure was too low and the cost of the nanny should in effect be doubled by charging her gross wages and NI contribution and something for her food. In this he must have been right, because there never was going to be a nanny and such items of expenditure will never have been incurred by anybody at all.’

Judges:

Croom-Johnston LJ

Citations:

[1988] 1 WLR 847, [1988] 3 All ER 1031, [1988] EWCA Civ 16, [1988] 1 WLR 847

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Fatal Accidents Act 1846 2, Law Reform (Miscellaneous Previsions) Act 1934

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Jefford v Gee CA 4-Mar-1970
The courts of Scotland followed the civil law in the award of interest on damages. The court gave examples of the way in which they apply the ex mora rule when calculating the interest payable in a judgment. If money was wrongfully withheld, then . .
Cited – Birkitt v Hayes 1982
Where a case takes a long time to come on for trial because there has been unjustifiable delay by the plaintiff, he has been kept out of his money by his own default for part of the period. It is a ‘special reason’ for not giving some of the . .

Cited by:

Cited – Bordin v St Mary’s NHS Trust QBD 2000
The claimant’s mother had died as a result of the negligence of the respondent.
Held: The calculation of past and future dependancy should refer to the care whether paid or unpaid actually provide or expected to be provided by the deceased. . .
Cited – Eagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 01 June 2022; Ref: scu.200639

Regina v Ministry of Defence, ex parte Walker: HL 6 Apr 2000

The Ministry of Defence operated a scheme for compensating soldiers serving abroad who were injured as a result of criminal activity. The claimant, whilst serving on a peace-keeping mission in Bosnia, was injured when a hut was hit by a shell fired from a Serbian tank. The scheme refused compensation. There is no necessary incompatibility between activities which were military and ones which were in breach of international law. The scheme could properly exclude injuries resulting from military activity.

Citations:

Times 07-Apr-2000, Gazette 11-May-2000, [2000] UKHL 22, [2000] 2 All ER 917

Links:

House of Lords, Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

At Admn – Regina v Ministry of Defence ex parte Walker Admn 9-Feb-1998
The court dismissed the plaintiff’s request for judicial review of the refusal of the Criminal Injuries Compensation (Overseas) Scheme. He was injured serving as a United Nations Peacekeeper in Bosnia, from a single round fired into the block by a . .
Appeal from – Regina v Ministry of Defence, Ex Parte Walker CA 5-Feb-1999
The scheme provided by the Ministry of Defence to compensate soldiers for being injured by criminal acts did not cover a wound inflicted by a shell fired from a tank whilst on peacekeeping duties. This was akin to a war injury.
Auld LJ said: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Armed Forces

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159056

Wisely v John Fulton Plumbers Ltd (Scotland) and Wadey v Surrey County Council: HL 6 Apr 2000

A plaintiff in a personal injury action, was entitled to claim, and be paid, interest on his award for compensation for lost earnings, even though some part of it was to be paid direct to the Department of Social Security by way of recovery of benefits. The scheme for recovery of benefits paid deliberately stayed clear of complications which would arise if attempts were to be made to recalculate awards if interest on this element was not to be included. Section 17 meant that interest had to be calculated by reference to a figure which ignored the fact that benefits had been received and ignored the fact that the defendant was paying the benefits to the Secretary of State.

Judges:

Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Woolf MR, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Lord Millett

Citations:

Times 07-Apr-2000, Gazette 31-May-2000, [2000] UKHL 24, [2000] 1 WLR 820

Links:

House of Lords, House of Lords, House of Lords, Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Wisely v John Fulton (Plumbers) Ltd IHCS 2-Dec-1998
Benefits which might be payable or recoverable in respect of damages should not be disregarded when the court considers what elements are to be allowed interest when calculating personal injury damages. . .

Cited by:

Appealed to – Wisely v John Fulton (Plumbers) Ltd IHCS 2-Dec-1998
Benefits which might be payable or recoverable in respect of damages should not be disregarded when the court considers what elements are to be allowed interest when calculating personal injury damages. . .
Cited – Eagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages, Benefits, Scotland

Updated: 31 May 2022; Ref: scu.159058