A court awarding personal injury damages could make allowance for a prospective increase in salary which a claimant might have achieved upon completion of qualifications. In this case an increase was allowed at half up from an administrative pay rate to a drama teacher’s pay rate.

Nourse LJ, Otton LJ, Chadwick LJ
Times 22-Jul-1998, Gazette 29-Jul-1998, [1998] EWCA Civ 1030, [1998] PIQR Q146
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Herring v Ministry of Defence CA 10-Apr-2003
The claimant had suffered serious injury in a parachuting accident which deprived him of the opportunity of pursuing his chosen career in the police force. The judge found ‘to the extent of virtual certainty’ that he would have applied to join the . .
Cited – Dixon v Were QBD 26-Oct-2004
The claimant and others were being driven by the defendant. All had drunk, and none wore seat belts. The claimant sought damages for his injuries. General damages were agreed, and the issue was as to loss of future earnings.
Held: The claimant . .
Cited – Gregg v Scott HL 27-Jan-2005
The patient saw his doctor and complained about a lump under his arm. The doctor failed to diagnose cancer. It was nine months before treatment was begun. The claimant sought damages for the reduction in his prospects of disease-free survival for . .
Cited – Brown v Ministry of Defence CA 10-May-2006
Claim for injury suffered whilst training in Army. The claimant was committed to a career in the Army, and had anticipated promotion. She complained that her loss of pension rights had been calculated at a rate to reflect an average length career. . .
Cited – Lawson v Glaves-Smith, Executor of the Estate of Dawes (Deceased) QBD 14-Nov-2006
The claimant sought damages saying that she had been falsely imprisoned, raped and drugged by the defendant who had since died.
Held: The court had only the evidence of the claimant, and must be careful in examining it. On that evidence the . .
Cited – Collett v Smith and Another QBD 11-Aug-2008
The claimant had been an eighteen year old playing football for Manchester United reserves when he was injured by a foul tackle which ended his football career. The defendant admitted liability, but denied that he would have gone on to be a premier . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Leading Case

Updated: 09 November 2021; Ref: scu.80116

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 defended a claim of negligence in their management of safety at the match at Hillsborough football stadium. They appealed against a decision that they had been insufficiently proximate to claim for nervous shock.
Held: The claim failed. The personal relationships were close enough for some claimants, but the scenes were broadcast in such a way that no individuals were capable of being identified. Foreseeability of injury does not of itself, and automatically, lead to a duty of care.
The House (Lord Oliver) distinguished between primary and secondary victims: ‘Broadly [the cases] divide into two categories, that is to say, those cases in which the injured plaintiff was involved, either mediately or immediately, as a participant, and those in which the plaintiff was no more than the passive and unwilling witness of injury caused to others.’ and
‘There is, to begin with, nothing unusual or peculiar in the recognition by the law that compensatable injury may be caused just as much by a direct assault upon the mind or the nervous system as by direct physical contact with the body. This is no more than the natural and inevitable result of the growing appreciation by modern medical science of recognisable causal connections between shock to the nervous system and physical or psychiatric illness. Cases in which damages are claimed for directly inflicted injuries of this nature may present difficulties of proof but they are not, in their essential elements, any different from cases where the damages claimed arise from direct physical injury and they present no very difficult problems of analysis where the plaintiff has himself been directly involved in the accident from which the injury is said to arise. In such a case he can be properly said to be the primary victim of the defendant’s negligence and the fact that the injury which he sustains is inflicted through the medium of an assault on the nerves or senses does not serve to differentiate the case, except possibly in the degree of evidentiary difficulty, from a case of direct physical injury.’

Lord Keith of Kinkel, Lord Ackner, Lord Oliver of Aylmerton, Lord Jauncey of Tullichettle and Lord Lowry
Gazette 22-Jan-1992, [1991] 3 WLR 1057, Times 29-Nov-1991, [1992] 1 AC 310, [1991] UKHL 5
lip, Bailii
Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1944 4(5)
England and Wales
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 – 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 – Jaensch v Coffey 20-Aug-1984
(High Court of Australia) The claimant’s husband was injured. She saw his injuries at hospital and was affected. She claimed damages for her own shock.
Held: The driver owed her a duty of care, and was liable for negligence which caused . .
Cited – Hinz v Berry CA 1970
Then plaintiff saw her husband killed and her children injured by a runaway motor car. At trial she was awarded damages for nervous shock. The question was whether, having regard to the fact that she had suffered sorrow and grief it would not be to . .
Doubted – Hevican v Ruane QBD 1991
The plaintiff’s son died in a car crash, and she claimed damages for nervous shock.
Held: Given the relationship, the psychological illness was reasonably foreseeable, and recoverable. . .
Doubted – Ravenscroft v Rederiaktiebolaget Transatlantic 1991
. .
Appeal from – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police CA 31-May-1991
The defendant policed a football match at which many people died. The plaintiffs, being relatives and friends of the deceased, inter alia suffered nervous shock having seen the events either from within the ground, or from outside or at home on . .
Cited – Currie v Wardrop 1927
The pursuer was walking arm in arm with her fiance when he was hit by a vehicle driven by the defender.
Held: She recovered damages for nervous shock involving apprehension for her own safety and the safety of her fiance, though he was hit and . .
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 – Donoghue (or M’Alister) v Stevenson HL 26-May-1932
Decomposed Snail in Ginger Beer Bottle – Liability
The appellant drank from a bottle of ginger beer manufactured by the defendant. She suffered injury when she found a half decomposed snail in the liquid. The glass was opaque and the snail could not be seen. The drink had been bought for her by a . .

Cited by:
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
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 – 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 . .
Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
Cited – Nobes, Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Schofield CA 14-May-1998
A police constable was entitled to claim damages for nervous shock after a co-officer unexpectedly and unlawfully fired off shots from a gun they had found as part of a search. . .
Cited – Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct . .
Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Cited – Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006
Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos dust. The defendants resisted saying that the injury alleged, the development of pleural plaques, was yet insufficient as damage to found a claim.
Held: (Smith LJ dissenting) The . .
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 – French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police CA 28-Mar-2006
The claimants sought damages for psychiatric injury. They were police officers who had been subject to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member of the public by their force.
Held: The claim failed: ‘these claimants have no . .
Cited – Toth v Jarman CA 19-Jul-2006
The claimant appealed dismissal of his claim for damages for nervous shock, associated with the alleged negligence of the defendant doctor in treating his son. It was said that the medical expert had not disclosed a conflict of interest.
Held: . .
Cited – Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd ChD 12-Mar-2008
The claimant said that the defendant bookmakers had been negligent in allowing him to continue betting when they should have known that he was acting under an addiction. The defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, . .
Cited – Yearworth and others v North Bristol NHS Trust CA 4-Feb-2009
The defendant hospital had custody of sperm samples given by the claimants in the course of fertility treatment. The samples were effectively destroyed when the fridge malfunctioned. Each claimant was undergoing chemotherapy which would prevent them . .
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 . .
Cited – Smith v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust and Another QBD 8-Sep-2016
The claimant had cohabited with the deceased: ‘The claimant seeks a declaration in one of two alternative forms:
i) Pursuant to s.3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 . . that s.1A(2)(a) of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 . . is to be read as including . .
Cited – Paul and Another v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust QBD 4-Jun-2020
Nervous shock – liability to third parties
The claimants witnessed the death of their father from a heart attack. They said that the defendant’s negligent treatment allowed the attack to take place. Difficult point of law about the circumstances in which a defendant who owes a duty of care . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.174247

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 happened. She saw and comforted her injured husband and children, and was told of the death of her youngest child. She brought proceedings for the psychiatric effect of the shock that she sustained as a result.
Held: Her appeal was allowed. The House identified the circumstances in which such a claim could succeed:
1. While damages cannot, at common law, be awarded for grief and sorrow, a claim for damages for ‘nervous shock’ caused by negligence can be made without the necessity of showing direct impact or fear of immediate personal injuries for oneself.
2. A plaintiff may recover damages for ‘nervous shock’ brought on by injury caused not to him — or herself but to a near relative, or by the fear of such injury.
3. Subject to the next paragraph, there is no English case in which a plaintiff has been able to recover nervous shock damages where the injury to the near relative occurred out of sight and earshot of the plaintiff.
4. An exception has been made where the plaintiff does not see or hear the incident but comes upon its immediate aftermath.
5. A remedy on account of nervous shock has been given to a man who came upon a serious accident involving numerous people immediately thereafter and acted as a rescuer of those involved.
Three issues were to be addressed: the class of persons whose claims should be recognised, the proximity of such persons to the accident and the means by which the shock was caused. Foreseeability in any given set of circumstances is ultimately a question of fact.
On the issue of the court’s role in developing the law, Lord Scarman: ‘By concentrating on principle the judges can keep the legal system clear of policy problems which neither they, nor the forensic process which it is their duty to operate, are equipped to resolve. If principle leads to results which are thought to be socially unacceptable, Parliament can legislate to draw a line or map out a new path.’
Lord Wilberforce said: ‘there remains, in my opinion, just because ‘shock’ in its nature is capable of affecting so wide a range of people, a real need for the law to place some limitation upon the extent of admissible claims.’ and
‘As regards proximity to the accident, it is obvious that this must be close in both time and space . . The shock must come through sight or hearing of the event or of its immediate aftermath.’
and ‘Whatever is unknown about the mind body relationship (and the area of ignorance seems to expand with that of knowledge), it is now accepted by medical science that recognisable and severe physical damage to the human body and system may be caused by the impact, through the senses, of external events on the mind. Thus there may be produced what is as identifiable an illness as any that may be caused by direct physical impact.’

Lord Wilberforce, Lord Bridge, Lord Scarman
[1983] 1 AC 410, [1982] 2 All ER 298, [1982] UKHL 3, [1982] 2 WLR 982
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
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 – Hinz v Berry CA 1970
Then plaintiff saw her husband killed and her children injured by a runaway motor car. At trial she was awarded damages for nervous shock. The question was whether, having regard to the fact that she had suffered sorrow and grief it would not be to . .
Rejected – 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 by:
Applied – Alcock and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police QBD 31-Jul-1990
Overcrowding at a football match lead to the deaths of 95 people. The defendant’s employees had charge of safety at the match, and admitted negligence vis-a-vis those who had died and been injured. The plaintiffs sought damages, some of them for . .
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 – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Marvin John Pearson v Anthony Lightning CA 1-Apr-1998
The parties were golfers playing different holes at the same time. The shot of one hit the other in the eye. The shot was a recovery shot over where he should have known others would be playing. Where a golfer hit a shot which was difficult but . .
Cited – Jaensch v Coffey 20-Aug-1984
(High Court of Australia) The claimant’s husband was injured. She saw his injuries at hospital and was affected. She claimed damages for her own shock.
Held: The driver owed her a duty of care, and was liable for negligence which caused . .
Cited – Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct . .
Cited – JD v East Berkshire Community Health NHS Trust and others HL 21-Apr-2005
Parents of children had falsely and negligently been accused of abusing their children. The children sought damages for negligence against the doctors or social workers who had made the statements supporting the actions taken. The House was asked if . .
Cited – Quayle and others v Regina, Attorney General’s Reference (No. 2 of 2004) CACD 27-May-2005
Each defendant appealed against convictions associated variously with the cultivation or possession of cannabis resin. They sought to plead medical necessity. There had been medical recommendations to move cannabis to the list of drugs which might . .
Cited – Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006
Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos dust. The defendants resisted saying that the injury alleged, the development of pleural plaques, was yet insufficient as damage to found a claim.
Held: (Smith LJ dissenting) The . .
Cited – French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police CA 28-Mar-2006
The claimants sought damages for psychiatric injury. They were police officers who had been subject to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member of the public by their force.
Held: The claim failed: ‘these claimants have no . .
Cited – Fook, Regina v CACD 22-Oct-1993
The defendant appealed his conviction for assault. He had suspected a lodger of theft, and was accused of having assaulted him while interrogating him about it. He locked the complainant in his room, but he then fell whilst escaping through a first . .
Cited – Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar HL 17-Oct-2007
The claimant sought damages for the development of neural plaques, having been exposed to asbestos while working for the defendant. The presence of such plaques were symptomless, and would not themselves cause other asbestos related disease, but . .
Cited – Hussain v West Mercia Constabulary CA 3-Nov-2008
The claimant taxi driver complained of misfeasance in public office in the way the defendant had responded to the several calls for assistance made by him to the police.
Held: His appeal against the striking out failed. The damages pleaded . .
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 – Rhodes v OPO and Another SC 20-May-2015
The mother sought to prevent a father from publishing a book about her child’s life. It was to contain passages she said may cause psychological harm to the 12 year old son. Mother and son lived in the USA and the family court here had no . .
Cited – OPO v MLA and Another CA 9-Oct-2014
The claimant child sought to prevent publication by his father of an autobiography which, he said, would be likely to cause him psychological harm. The father was well known classical musician who said that he had himself suffered sexual abuse as a . .
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 . .
Cited – Smith v Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust and Another QBD 8-Sep-2016
The claimant had cohabited with the deceased: ‘The claimant seeks a declaration in one of two alternative forms:
i) Pursuant to s.3 of the Human Rights Act 1998 . . that s.1A(2)(a) of the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 . . is to be read as including . .
Cited – Paul and Another v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust QBD 4-Jun-2020
Nervous shock – liability to third parties
The claimants witnessed the death of their father from a heart attack. They said that the defendant’s negligent treatment allowed the attack to take place. Difficult point of law about the circumstances in which a defendant who owes a duty of care . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.180105

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 fall was itself a result of the original injury.
Held: An application of the ‘but for’ test would not result in any deduction. If that test is properly to be applied, the May 1999 accident, if it had any causative effect, would no more reduce Mr Ellis’ damages than would the negligence of a second driver when the injured passenger claimed his full loss against a negligent first driver. There is no free-standing principle which would give apportioning effect to a contributory intervening event. The expression appears to have overtones of contributory negligence which was not in point.

May LJ, Hallett LJ, Lawrence Collins LJ
[2008] EWCA Civ 1117
Bailii
Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw HL 1-Mar-1956
The injury of which the employee complained came from two sources, a pneumatic hammer, in respect of which the employers were not in breach of the relevant Regulations; and swing grinders, in respect of which they were in breach.
Held: It had . .
Cited – McGhee v National Coal Board HL 1973
The claimant who was used to emptying pipe kilns at a brickworks was sent to empty brick kilns where the working conditions were much hotter and dustier. His employers failed, in breach of their duty, to provide him with washing facilities after his . .
Cited – Wilsher v Essex Area Health Authority HL 24-Jul-1986
A premature baby suffered injury after mistaken treatment by a hospital doctor. He had inserted a monitor into the umbilical vein. The claimant suggested the treatment should have been by a more senior doctor. The hospital appealed a finding that it . .
Cited – Clough v First Choice Holidays and Flights Ltd CA 25-Jan-2006
The appellant broke his neck slipping from a wall in a swimming pool in Lanzarote. The wall was not coated with fully non-slip paint. At first instance the failure to use such paint was held negligent for the purpose of the contract between them and . .
Cited – Fairchild v Glenhaven Funeral Services Ltd and Others HL 20-Jun-2002
The claimants suffered mesothelioma after contact with asbestos while at work. Their employers pointed to several employments which might have given rise to the condition, saying it could not be clear which particular employment gave rise to the . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Allen and Others v British Rail Engineering Ltd and Another CA 23-Feb-2001
The claimants suffered vibration white finger working for the defendants with percussive tools over many years to 1987, but then continued in other employments which also involved vibrating tools and which caused further damage. The claimants made . .
Cited – Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd HL 27-Feb-2008
The claimant’s husband had committed suicide. She sought damages for financial loss from his former employers under the 1976 Act. He had suffered a severe and debilitating injury working for them leading to his depression and suicide. The employers . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.276974

In each of three cases, the plaintiffs had suffered serious injury. They complained that the court had made a substantial reduction of their damages award for loss of future earnings and the costs of future care.
Held: The appeals succeeded.
The purpose of an award of damages in tort was to make good to the injured Plaintiff, so far as money can do so, the loss that he had suffered as a result of the wrong done to him. In awarding damages in the form of a lump sum the Court had to calculate as best it could the sum that would be adequate, by drawing down both capital and income, to apply periodical sums equal to the Plaintiff’s estimated loss over the period during which that loss was likely to continue. The injured Plaintiff was not in the same position as an ordinary prudent investor and was entitled to the greater security and certainty achieved by investment in index-linked government securities, in respect of which the current net discount rate was 3%. The courts should allow for the indexation of investment returns linked with the index-linked government securities index, since the claimants would be unable to risk fluctuations in investment returns from equity based investments.
Lord Hope said: ‘the object of the award of damages for future expenditure is to place the injured party as nearly as possible in the same financial position as he or she would have been in but for the accident. The aim is to award such a sum of money that will amount to no more, and at the same time no less, than the net loss.’
Lord Lloyd of Berwick said of the Ogden Tables: ‘I do not suggest that the judge should be a slave to the tables. There may well be special factors in particular cases. But the tables should now be regarded as the starting-point, rather than a check. A judge should be slow to depart from the relevant actuarial multiplier on impressionistic grounds, or by reference to ‘a spread of multipliers in comparable cases’ especially when the multipliers were fixed before actuarial tables were widely used.’
Lord Clyde said: ‘One clear principle is that what the successful plaintiff will in the event actually do with the award is irrelevant.’

Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Steyn, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Clyde, Lord Hutton
Times 20-Jul-1998, Gazette 16-Sep-1998, [1998] UKHL 27, [1999] 1 AC 345, [1998] 3 WLR 329, [1998] 3 All ER 481, [1998] PIQR Q56, [1998] IRLR 536, [1998] 2 FLR 507, (1998) 43 BMLR 99, [1998] Fam Law 593
House of Lords, Bailii
Damages Act 1996 2(1)
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Wells v Wells; Thomas v Brighton Health Authority; Page v Sheerness Steel Company Limited CA 23-Oct-1996
The plaintiff was a member of a scheme providing permanent health insurance benefits. The issue was whether the insurance monies received by the plaintiff were to be treated as sick pay (and therefore deductible from the damages) or insurance monies . .

Cited by:
Cited – McNulty v Marshalls Food Group Ltd OHCS 7-Jan-1999
(Scotland) The pursuer had no pre-existing degenerative condition of his lower spine, although he had degenerative changes in his cervical spine. As a result of an accident he sustained a prolapsed inter vertebral disc in his lumbar spine as a . .
Cited – Warren v Northern General Hospital Trust CA 10-Apr-2000
It was not open to lower courts to reduce the guideline discount interest rate applied to damages awards to account for future returns. The original figure was set in the Act and by the House of Lords in Wells v Wells. Also the lower rates of . .
Cited – Ogden Tables LCJ 3-May-1999
Given the reduction in levels of interest on government index-linked stocks, and the assumed rate of return for the purposes of the assumed rate of return, the committee would continue to fix the return rate rather than set a method of calculation. . .
Cited – Dharamshi v Dharamshi CA 5-Dec-2000
On a divorce where there were fairly substantial sums at issue, the two parties argued for different bases for calculation of the wife’s interests, either her reasonable needs according to Duxbury tables, or otherwise to reflect the particular . .
Cited – Cooke, Sheppard, Page v United Bristol Health Care, Stibbe and Another, Lee CA 16-Oct-2003
The claimant appealed against his damages award, saying that it should have allowed for the anticipated rises in the cost of providing his care in the future.
Held: Rises in future costs were already factored into the tables used for . .
Cited – Eagle (By Her Litigation Friend) v Chambers CA 29-Jul-2004
The claimant had been severely injured, and a substantial damages award made. Cross appeals were heard as to the several elements awarded. The claimant sought as part of her award of damages for personal injuries the fees she would have to pay to . .
Cited – Collett v Smith and Another QBD 11-Aug-2008
The claimant had been an eighteen year old playing football for Manchester United reserves when he was injured by a foul tackle which ended his football career. The defendant admitted liability, but denied that he would have gone on to be a premier . .
Cited – A v B Hospitals NHS Trust Admn 10-Nov-2006
The claimant baby had suffered catastrophic injuries at birth in the defendant’s hospital. Liability having been admitted, the court now considered whether damages should be paid as a lump sum or by periodical payments.
Held: ‘ the form of . .
Applied – Barry v Ablerex Construction (Midlands) Ltd QBD 22-Mar-2000
After a delay of delay 5 years, the judge deducted two years interest from the award to reflect the plaintiff’s delay. . .
Cited – Barry v Ablerex Construction (Midlands) Ltd CA 30-Mar-2001
It was appropriate to reduce the interest discount rate used to calculate damages awards in personal injury cases for future losses, from 3 per cent to 2 per cent. This reflected the general reduction in such interest rates since the Act came into . .
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 . .
Cited – Heil v Rankin, Rees v Mabco (102) Ltd, Schofield v Saunders and Taylor Ltd and Other cases CA 23-Mar-2000
The Law Commission had recommended that the general level of damages awarded for pain suffering and loss of amenity in personal injury cases should be raised. The Court now considered several cases on the issue.
Held: The court would do so. . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.158958

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 to time.
Held: (Majority) A claim in contract or tort for damages for psychiatric injury is a claim in respect of personal injuries. A claim for damages for nervous shock was possible where a physical injury was foreseeable even though not the nervous shock itself might not be foreseeable. The court must approach such questions considering the ‘control mechanisms’. Once it was established that the defendant was under a duty of care to avoid causing personal injury to the claimant, it mattered not whether the injury sustained was physical, psychiatric or both. Liability would be established without the necessity to prove as an independent part of the cause of action that psychiatric injury, in the absence of physical injury, was foreseeable.
It was sufficient that the defendant should have foreseen that his negligent driving might cause some physical injury. It did not matter that he could not have foreseen that the event which actually happened, namely a minor collision, would cause psychiatric injury.
Lord Lloyd of Berwick spoke as to the decision of the Court of Appeal: ‘In all these cases the plaintiff was the secondary victim of the defendant’s negligence. He or she was in the position of a spectator or bystander. In the present case, by contrast, the plaintiff was a participant. He was himself directly involved in an accident and well within the range of foreseeable physical injury. ‘ to which question the provisional answer was: ‘Foreseeability of psychiatric injury remains a crucial ingredient when the plaintiff is the secondary victim, for the very reason that the secondary victim is almost always outside the area of physical impact, and therefore outside the range of foreseeable physical injury. But where the plaintiff is the primary victim of the defendant’s negligence, the nervous shock cases, by which I mean the cases following on from Bourhill v Young, are not in point. Since the defendant was admittedly under a duty of care not to cause the plaintiff foreseeable physical injury, it was unnecessary to ask whether he was under a separate duty of care not to cause foreseeable psychiatric injury.’ and
‘Liability for physical injury depends on what was reasonably foreseeable by the defendant before the event. It could not be right that a negligent defendant should escape liability for psychiatric injury just because, though serious physical injury was foreseeable, it did not in fact transpire. Such a result in the case of a primary victim is neither necessary, logical nor just. To introduce hindsight into the trial of an ordinary running-down action would do the law no service.’
Lord Lloyd of Berwick: ‘The test in every case ought to be whether the defendant can reasonably foresee that his conduct will expose the plaintiff to risk of personal injury. If so, then he comes under a duty of care to that plaintiff. If a working definition of ‘personal injury’ is needed, it can be found in section 38(1) of the Limitation Act 1980: ‘Personal injuries’ includes any disease and any impairment of a person’s physical or mental condition . . ‘. There are numerous other statutory definitions to the same effect. In the case of a secondary victim, the question would usually turn on whether the foreseeable injury is psychiatric, for reasons already explained. In the case of a primary victim the question will almost always turn on whether the foreseeable injury is physical. But it is the same test in both cases, with different applications. There is no justification for regarding physical and psychiatric injury as different ‘kinds’ of injury. Once it is established that the defendant is under a duty of care to avoid causing personal injury to a plaintiff, it matters not whether the injury in fact sustained is physical, psychiatric or both. … Applying that test in the present case, it was enough to ask whether the defendant should reasonably have foreseen that the plaintiff might suffer physical injury as a result of the defendant’s negligence, so as to bring him within the range of the defendant’s duty of care. It was unnecessary to ask, as a separate question, whether the defendant should reasonably have foreseen injury by shock; and it is irrelevant that the defendant did not, in fact, suffer any external physical injury.’
Lord Browne-Wilkinson: ‘Medical science has also demonstrated that there are other injuries the body can suffer as a consequence of an accident, such injuries not being demonstrably attributable directly to physical injury to the plaintiff. Injuries of this type may take two forms. First, physical illness or injury not brought about by the chain of demonstrable physical events, but by mental or emotional stresses, i.e. by a psychiatric route. Examples are a heart attack or a miscarriage produced by shock. In this case, the end product is a physical condition although it has been brought about by a process which is not demonstrably a physical one but lies in the mental or nervous system. The second form is psychiatric illness itself which is brought about by mental or emotional stresses, i.e. by a psychiatric route. . . . I am therefore of opinion that any driver of a car should reasonably foresee that, if he drives carelessly, he will be liable to cause injury, either physical or psychiatric or both, to other users of the highway who become involved in an accident. Therefore he owes to such persons a duty of care to avoid such injury. In the present case the defendant could not foresee the exact type of psychiatric damage in fact suffered by the plaintiff who, due to his M.E., was ‘an eggshell personality’ but that is of no significance since the defendant did owe a duty of care to prevent foreseeable damage, including psychiatric damage. Once such a duty of care is established, the defendant must take the plaintiff as he finds him.’

Lord Lloyd of Berwick, Lord Browne-Wilkinson, Lord Ackner
Gazette 14-Jun-1995, Independent 12-May-1995, Times 12-May-1995, (1995) 92 LSG 33, [1995] RTR 210, [1996] AC 155, [1995] 2 All ER 736, [1995] UKHL 7, [1995] PIQR P329, [1995] 2 WLR 644, [1995] 2 Lloyds Rep 95
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Page v Smith CA 4-May-1994
The plaintiff was driving his car at 30 miles an hour when the defendant turned right immediately into his path. In the accident both cars suffered damage but the occupants all escaped physical injury. The Plaintiff, however, had suffered for 20 . .
Cited – King v Phillips CA 1952
Denning LJ said: ‘there can be no doubt since Bourhill v. Young that the test of liability for shock is foreseeability of injury by shock.’ A person ‘who suffers shock on being told of an accident to a loved one cannot recover damages from 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 by:
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – 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 . .
Cited – Gogay v Hertfordshire County Council CA 26-Jul-2000
The employee sought damages for breach of the implied term of trust and confidence, even though she remained throughout the employment of the Council against whom she was bringing proceedings.
Held: Her remaining in employment was a factor . .
Cited – Dunnachie v Kingston Upon Hull City Council; Williams v Southampton Institute; Dawson v Stonham Housing Association EAT 8-Apr-2003
EAT Unfair Dismissal – Compensation
In each case, The employee sought additional damages for non-economic loss after an unfair dismissal.
Held: The Act could be compared with the Discrimination Acts . .
Regretted – 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 . .
Applied – A and Another v Essex County Council CA 17-Dec-2003
The claimant sought damages. The respondent had acted as an adoption agency but had failed to disclose all relevant information about the child.
Held: Any such duty extended only during the period where the child was with the prospective . .
Cited – AB and others v Leeds Teaching Hospital NHS Trust, Cardiff and Vale NHS Trust QBD 26-Mar-2004
Representative claims were made against the respondents, hospitals, pathologists etc with regard to the removal of organs from deceased children without the informed consent of the parents. They claimed under the tort of wrongful interference.
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 – Donachie v The Chief Constable of the Greater Manchester Police CA 7-Apr-2004
The claimant had been asked to work under cover. The surveillance equipment he was asked to use was faulty, requiring him to put himself at risk repeatedly to maintain it resulting in a stress disorder and a stroke.
Held: There was a direct . .
Cited – Nobes, Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police v Schofield CA 14-May-1998
A police constable was entitled to claim damages for nervous shock after a co-officer unexpectedly and unlawfully fired off shots from a gun they had found as part of a search. . .
Cited – Bici and Bici v Ministry of Defence QBD 7-Apr-2004
Claimants sought damages for personal injuries incurred when, in Pristina, Kosovo and during a riot, British soldiers on a UN peacekeeping expedition fired on a car.
Held: The incidents occurred in the course of peace-keeping duties. It was . .
Cited – Eastwood and another v Magnox Electric plc; McCabe v Cornwall County Council and others HL 15-Jul-2004
The first claimants were long standing employees. Mr Eastwood fell out with his manager, who disciplined him using false statements. When Williams refused to provide a false statement he too was disciplined. Each claimed damages for the injury to . .
Cited – Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd and Another CA 26-Jan-2006
Each claimant sought damages after being exposed to asbestos dust. The defendants resisted saying that the injury alleged, the development of pleural plaques, was yet insufficient as damage to found a claim.
Held: (Smith LJ dissenting) The . .
Criticised – 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 – Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd CA 31-Mar-2006
The deceased had suffered a head injury whilst working for the defendant. In addition to severe physical consequences he suffered post-traumatic stress, became more and more depressed, and then committed suicide six years later. The claimant . .
Cited – French and others v Chief Constable of Sussex Police CA 28-Mar-2006
The claimants sought damages for psychiatric injury. They were police officers who had been subject to unsuccessful proceedings following a shooting of a member of the public by their force.
Held: The claim failed: ‘these claimants have no . .
Cited – Johnston v NEI International Combustion Ltd; Rothwell v Chemical and Insulating Co Ltd; similar HL 17-Oct-2007
The claimant sought damages for the development of neural plaques, having been exposed to asbestos while working for the defendant. The presence of such plaques were symptomless, and would not themselves cause other asbestos related disease, but . .
Cited – Calvert v William Hill Credit Ltd ChD 12-Mar-2008
The claimant said that the defendant bookmakers had been negligent in allowing him to continue betting when they should have known that he was acting under an addiction. The defendant company had a policy for achieving responsible gambling, . .
Cited – Corr v IBC Vehicles Ltd HL 27-Feb-2008
The claimant’s husband had committed suicide. She sought damages for financial loss from his former employers under the 1976 Act. He had suffered a severe and debilitating injury working for them leading to his depression and suicide. The employers . .
Cited – Flood v The University Court of the University of Glasgow OHCS 8-Jul-2008
The pursuer, a college lecturer claimed damages for stress related injury suffered as a result of overwork. She had communicated with her managers many times about the overload. Other staff had resigned for similar reasons.
Held: The pursuer . .
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 – Paul and Another v The Royal Wolverhampton NHS Trust QBD 4-Jun-2020
Nervous shock – liability to third parties
The claimants witnessed the death of their father from a heart attack. They said that the defendant’s negligent treatment allowed the attack to take place. Difficult point of law about the circumstances in which a defendant who owes a duty of care . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Leading Case

Updated: 02 November 2021; Ref: scu.84536

The claimant had received andpound;100,000 in interim payments on his personal injury claim, and now sought a further similar sum.
Held: The claim was thought substantial, but the defendants said that any final award would include an arrangement for continuing care, and a further payment would prejudice the court’s ability to make such an award. This was a case where a judge could not be expected to wish to make a Periodical Payments Order, and the Eeles principles did not apply. The order was made for a further payment on accunt.

Walker J
[2009] EWHC 2907 (QB)
Bailii
Damages Act 1996 2
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Tameside and Glossop Acute Services NHS Trust v Thompstone and others CA 17-Jan-2008
The court set out the legal principles applying when making a Periodical Payments Order in an award of damages for serious personal injury. The periodical payments payable to the claimant in respect of his care costs should be calculated by . .
Cited – Cobham Hire Services Ltd v Eeles CA 13-Mar-2009
The court was asked what is the correct approach to the making of an interim payment in a heavy personal injury claim where the damages, when finally assessed, are likely to include one or more periodical payments orders pursuant to section 2 of the . .
Cited – Rowe v Dolman CA 23-Jul-2008
The claimant had been very severely injured in a road accident. The court was asked to determine the effect on his life expectancy, the experts had diverged as to the appropriate range of life expectancy.
Held: The judge had assessed the . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.379561

The claimant sought damages after her husband’s death. The defendant sought to deduct from any damages payable, the payments made from its Employee Benefit Trust.
Held: The payments were to be disregarded. The payments accrued to the claimant not through her late husband’s estate but directly through the trust. The claim was made through the estate. The payments fell within section 4 of the 1976 Act as amended. This was in line with Parliament’s intention in 1982. The employer could have achieved the result he now sought by making payment expressly excluded from section 4 by being a conditional payment on account of its liabilities to the deceased’s estate.

Lord Justice Ward, Lord Justice Dyson and Lady Justice Smith
[2008] EWCA Civ 447, Times 25-Jun-2008
Bailii
Fatal Accidents Act 1976 3 4
England and Wales

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.267550

The tortfeasor, a member of the claimant’s family provided her with voluntary nursing care after the injury. The equivalent cost of that care, was recoverable, but would be held on trust for the carer. The underlying rationale of English Law is to enable the voluntary carer to receive proper recompense for his or her services: ‘Thus in both England and Scotland, the law now ensures that an injured plaintiff may recover the reasonable value of gratuitous services rendered to him by way of voluntary care by a member of his family . . [T]he underlying rationale of the English law . . is to enable the voluntary carer to receive proper recompense for his or her services.’ The policy considerations which underlie the exceptions were ‘well understood’ . . ‘But I find it difficult to see what considerations of public policy can justify a requirement that the tortfeasor himself should compensate the plaintiff twice over for the self-same loss. If the loss in question is a direct pecuniary loss (eg loss of wages), Hussain’s case is clear authority that the defendant employer, as the tortfeasor who makes good the loss either voluntarily or contractually, thereby mitigates his liability in damages pro tanto.’

Lord Bridge of Harwich
Independent 05-May-1994, Times 02-May-1994, Gazette 07-Sep-1994, [1994] 2 AC 350, [1994] UKHL 4, [1994] 2 All ER 385
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – 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, . .
Doubted – Donnelly v Joyce CA 18-May-1973
A six year old injured his leg in a road accident, and needed daily attention. His mother gave up her job to look after him. The claim for damages on behalf of he boy included the mother’s loss of earnings. This was objected to on the grounds that . .
Cited – Parry v Cleaver HL 5-Feb-1969
PI Damages not Reduced for Own Pension
The plaintiff policeman was disabled by the negligence of the defendant and received a disablement pension. Part had been contributed by himself and part by his employer.
Held: The plaintiff’s appeal succeeded. Damages for personal injury were . .

Cited by:
Appealed to – 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, . .
Cited – Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons CA 19-Mar-2003
Both parties appealed against the lower court’s orders. The claimant, a child was injured by a car driven by the defendant, who had been found 25% responsible. The claimant had suffered head injuries, and subsequently epilepsy.
Held: The award . .
Cited – Giambrone and others v JMC Holidays Ltd (Formerly Sunworld Holidays Ltd) QBD 20-Dec-2002
. .
Cited – Giambrone and others v Sunworld Holidays Ltd CA 18-Feb-2004
Many holidaymakers had suffered gastro-enteritis and sued for compensation. They had sought a sum to reflect the value of gratuitous care.
Held: Save in more serious cases, awards for children suffering gastro-enteritis and cared for by their . .
Cited – Pirelli General Plc and others v Gaca CA 26-Mar-2004
The claimant was awarded damages from his employers, who claimed that the benefits received by the claimant from an insurance policy to which the defendants had contributed should be set off against the claim.
Held: McCamley was no longer good . .
Cited – Dimond v Lovell HL 12-May-2000
A claimant sought as part of her damages for the cost of hiring a care whilst her own was off the road after an accident caused by the defendant. She agreed with a hire company to hire a car, but payment was delayed until the claim was settled.
Cited – Dobson and others v Thames Water Utilities Ltd and Another CA 29-Jan-2009
The claimants complained of odours and mosquitoes affecting their properties from the activities of the defendants in the conduct of their adjoining Sewage Treatment plant. The issue was as to the rights of non title holders to damages in nuisance . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Leading Case

Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.81534

Damages – earnings loss for persistent disability

The plaintiff, a part time domestic cleaner slipped and injured herself (a frozen shoulder) when working for the defendant. It was accepted that the cause of the slip was the defendant’s negligence. At the time of the claim she was still employed by the defendant, but she asked for an award of damages for a possible future loss of earning as a result of being disadvantaged in the employment market. .
Held: The court awarded damages for the potential loss to the plaintiff from the plaintiff’s reduced earning capacity, equivalent to the loss of her competitive position in the labour market. Such an award was intended to compensate a plaintiff who is in employment, for a handicap in getting a new job if he lost the current one and for the longer than normal periods out of work between jobs because of his disability.
The damages award of andpound;300 for this element was increased to andpound;1,000.
Scarman LJ said: ‘Loss of future earnings or future earning capacity is usually compounded of two elements. The first is when a victim of an accident finds that he or she can, as a result of the accident, no longer earn his or her pre-accident rate of earnings. In such a case there is an existing reduction in earning capacity which can be calculated as an annual sum. It is then perfectly possible to form a view as to the working life of the plaintiff and, taking the usual contingencies into account, to apply to that annual sum of loss of earnings a figure which is considered to be the appropriate number of years’ purchase in order to reach a capital figure. Fortunately in this case there is no such loss sustained by the plaintiff because, notwithstanding her accident, she has continued with her employment at the same rate of pay and, as long as she is employed by the Manchester Corporation, is likely, if not certain, to continue at the rate of pay appropriate to her pre-accident grade of employment. That element of loss, therefore, does not arise in this case.
The second element in this type of loss is the weakening of the plaintiff’s competitive position in the open labour market: that is to say, should the plaintiff lose her current employment, what are her chances of obtaining comparable employment in the open labour market? The evidence here is plain:- that, in the event (which one hopes will never materialise) of her losing her employment with the Manchester Corporation, she, with a stiff shoulder and a disabled right arm, is going to have to compete in the domestic labour market with women who are physically fully able. This represents a serious weakening of her competitive position in the one market into which she can go to obtain employment. It is for that reason that it is quite wrong to describe this weakness as a ‘possible’ loss of earning capacity: it is an existing loss: she is already weakened to Rat extent, though fortunately she is protected for the time being against suffering any financial damage because she does not, at Present, have to go into the labour market.
It is clearly inappropriate, when assessing this element of loss to attempt to calculate any annual sum or to apply to any annual sum so many years’ purchase. The court has to look at the weakness so to speak ‘in the round’, take note of the various contingencies, and do its best to reach an assessment which will do -justice to the plaintiff. ‘

Edmund Davies, Stamp, Scarman LJJ
(1974) 17 KIR 1, [1974] EWCA Civ 6
Bailii
England and Wales
Cited by:
Explained – Moeliker v Reyrolle and Co Ltd CA 1976
The court considered the principles for the award of damages for future loss of earning capacity.
Held: The court distinguished between an award for loss of earnings and compensation for loss of earning capacity. The latter head of damage . .
Cited – Phillips v Holliday and Another CA 6-Jul-2001
The claimant was injured when scaffolding on which he was working collapsed. The defendants appealed the awards for loss of future earnings. The claimant was self-employed working through a limited company controlled by his wife. His past earnings . .
Cited – Woolley v Essex County Council CA 17-May-2006
. .
Cited – Billett v Ministry of Defence CA 23-Jul-2015
Defendant’s appeal against the quantum of damages awarded in a personal injury action. The principal issue is how the court should assess damages for loss of future earning capacity in circumstances where the claimant suffers from a minor . .

Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Damages, Personal Injury

Leading Case

Updated: 31 October 2021; Ref: scu.188135