Category: Personal Injury

Harkin v Hellawell (Sued As the Chief Constable of West Yorks Police): CA 4 Dec 1997

The claimant had been bitten by a police dog and wished to claim damages. She appealed refusal of an order for records of the dog to be disclosed.
Held: The request was phrased impossibly widely and had been properly refused.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2915

Statutes:

Animals Act 1971 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Litigation Practice, Animals

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143314

Price v United Engineering Steels Limited; J J Habershon and Sons Limited: CA 12 Dec 1997

The plaintiff sought damages for deafness following exposure to excessive noise during his employment with the first and second defendants some 20 to 35 years previously. He issued his writ six years after the date of knowledge under LA section 14 and therefore three years after expiry of the limitation period. The judge had declined to extend time under section 33, having regard to prejudice caused by the loss of evidence and records in the period before the plaintiff’s date of knowledge.
Held: The appeal failed. The Court of Appeal extended the principle stated by Lord Oliver in Donovan so as to cover a period of time before the plaintiff knew, or could have known, that he had a claim. It would not be right to characterise this as ‘dilatoriness’. ‘Passage of time’ would be a fairer description.

Judges:

Brooke, Waller LJJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2983, [1998] PIQR P407

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 33 811

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others CA 23-May-2014
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injury which had been rejected on basis that it was out of time. He had contracted cancer in 2002, but had recovered. He later came to attribute this to exposure to asbestos at work . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.143382

Creutzfeld Jakob Disease Litigation; Newman and Others v Medical Research Council and Another: CA 20 Dec 1997

The claimants had been negligently injected as children with Hartree HGH, a human growth hormone that exposed them to the risk of contracting CJD. One issue was whether this rendered the defendants liable for psychiatric illness caused by the shock of learning of the risk to which they had been exposed.
Held: Litigation for Creutzfeld Jacob Disease cut off date for litigation; those receiving treatment before and after must show would have stopped. ‘I can see no logical reason why foreseeability of or responsibility for shock and psychiatric injury should be limited to an area of time contemporaneous or almost contemporaneous to the negligent physical event i.e. the injection of Hartree HGH. If the psychiatric injury was reasonably foreseeable it should be untrammelled by spatial physical or temporal limits (see per Lord Scarman in McLoughlin at page 414A).’

Judges:

Morland J

Citations:

Times 20-Dec-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2749, [2000] Lloyds Law Rep (Medical) 161

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Personal Injury

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.79626

Mather v Ministry of Defence: QBD 31 Mar 2021

Action brought by the Claimant as a former employee of the Defendant for personal injuries in the nature of multiple sclerosis and psychiatric injury which he alleges has been suffered as a result of his use of organic solvents in the course of his work as a painter and finisher with the RAF between 1989 and 2003.

Judges:

Freedman J

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 811 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.660814

International Energy Group Ltd v Zurich Insurance Plc UK Branch: CA 6 Feb 2013

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP CA, Toulson, Aikens LJJ

Citations:

[2013] EWCA Civ 39

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – 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 . .

Cited by:

Appeal From – 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

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470802

Wall v Mutuelle De Poitiers Assurances: QBD 25 Jan 2013

Judges:

Tugendhat J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 53 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001

Citing:

Cited – FBTO Schadeverzekeringen v Jack Odenbreit ECJ 13-Dec-2007
ECJ Regulation (EC) No 44/2001 – Jurisdiction in matters relating to insurance – Liability insurance – Action brought by the injured party directly against the insurer – Rule of jurisdiction of the courts for the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

European, Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470592

NM v Lanarkshire Health Board: SCS 23 Jan 2013

Inner House – The pursuer and reclaimer sought reparation for son after grave injury sustained at his birth in a maternity hospital run by the defenders and respondents. She attributes that injury to negligence in a consultant obstetrician. Following a proof, the Lord Ordinary concluded that negligence had not been established and he assoilzied the defenders. The pursuer now reclaimed against that decision.
Held: The Lord Ordinary’s judgment was upheld.

Judges:

Lord Eassie, Lord Hardie, Lord Emslie

Citations:

[2013] ScotCS CSIH – 3, 2013 SC 245, 2013 GWD 5-136

Links:

Bailii

Citing:

Appeal from – Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board SCS 30-Jul-2010
Outer House – The pursuer sought damages for personal injuries to her son at his birth, alleging negligence by the medical staff at the defender hospital. She said that she had been advised a cesarian birth for her child, but the doctors had not . .
Cited – Sidaway v Board of Governors of the Bethlem Royal Hospital and the Maudsley Hospital HL 21-Feb-1985
Explanation of Medical Risks essential
The plaintiff alleged negligence in the failure by a surgeon to disclose or explain to her the risks inherent in the operation which he had advised.
Held: The appeal failed. A mentally competent patient has an absolute right to refuse to . .

Cited by:

Appeal from – Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board SC 11-Mar-2015
Change in Doctors’ Information Obligations
The pursuer claimed that her obstetrician had been negligent, after her son suffered severe injury at birth. The baby faced a birth with shoulder dystocia – the inability of the shoulders to pass through the pelvis. The consultant considered that a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Scotland, Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470538

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 claimant and his friends were drunk and had pulled down there trousers to insilt him, and had banged on his car. He said that he had tried to escape, but had driven over the claimant.
Held: ‘I do not consider that the claimant can be absolved of all responsibility. He deliberately placed himself in the road in front of the defendant’s car and remained there at a time when he should have known that the traffic lights were likely to change and the defendant would want to move forward. His drunken state and dropped trousers hampered his ability to move freely and at a normal speed out of the path of the defendant’s car. I am satisfied that it was the fact that the claimant was not moving at a normal speed that led the defendant to misjudge the claimant’s position and mistakenly to believe that he could get past the claimant without striking him. In the circumstances, I consider that it is just and equitable to apportion liability 80% to the defendant and 20% to the claimant. ‘

Judges:

Swift DBE J

Citations:

[2013] EWHC 40 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

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

Citing:

Cited – North v TNt Express (UK) Ltd CA 25-May-2001
The claimant, who was drunk and a member of a group of people in a similar condition, asked the defendant, a lorry driver, for a lift. When the defendant refused, the claimant climbed onto the front bumper of the defendant’s lorry, holding on by the . .
Cited – Eagle v Chambers CA 24-Jul-2003
The claimant was severely injured when run down by the defendant driving his car. She was in Blackpool, and drunk and wandering in the highway. The defendant was himself at or near the drink driving limit. She appealed against a finding that she was . .
Cited – Rehill v Rider Holdings Ltd CA 16-May-2012
The claimant had been injured, being hit by the defendant’s bus. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 13 November 2022; Ref: scu.470370

CICA v CICP/First-Tier Tribunal and TS: UTAA 19 Nov 2012

TS (aged 14) was riding his bicycle. A dog ran out and chased him into the path of a car. He suffered serious injury. The dog had known aggressive characteristics. His claim to CICA was rejected on the basis that no crime of violence was involved. CICA sought judicial review of the first tier tribunal’s decision against it, and the request was referred to the UTAA. It said that there had been no crime of violence.
Held: The request was refused.
Levenson UTJ said: ‘ Applying the law as explained above, the first question is whether an offence under section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 is a crime of violence for the purposes of the 2001 scheme. This is a question of law. I can see nothing in the legislation, the 2001 scheme or the case law that would prevent such an offence being classed as a crime of violence. The offence can only be committed if a dog is ‘dangerously out of control’ (my emphasis). Even the non-aggravated offence carries a possible sentence of six months imprisonment. The concept of the dog being dangerously out of control involves grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person (my emphasis). The fact that no mens rea (mental attitude that must be established before the offence can be proved to have been committed) is specified does not stop it being a crime of violence for the purposes of the scheme, notwithstanding Mr Johnson’s assertions to the contrary . . I accept that the reasons given by the panel in the present case could have been more detailed and extensive but I reject Mr Johnson’s caricature of the decision as being that ‘an unidentified offender had committed some unspecified crime of violence’. In my view the First-tier Tribunal did enough to establish that the dog’s owner had committed a crime of violence under the 1971 Act. It referred to the history of the dog being aggressive if it got loose from the back yard and it explicitly accepted evidence which (although the panel did not spell it out) established that the offence had been committed.’

Judges:

Levenson UTJ

Citations:

[2012] UKUT 444 (AAC)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 3

Citing:

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 – Jones v First Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) CA 12-Apr-2011
The claimant had been driving his lorry. A man jumped in front of a second lorry in an apparent attempt to commit suicide. In a failed attempt to avoid the suicide, the second lorry crashed into the claimant causing catastrophic injuries. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.468806

Jackson v Murray and Another: SCS 27 Dec 2012

Extra Division, Inner House. The pursuer, a child, alighted from a school bus, and, on emerging into the road was hit by a car driven by the defender, suffering serious injury. She now appealed against a finding that she was 90% responsible for her injuries.
Held: The Division allowed the pursuer’s appeal and assessed her contributory negligence instead at 70%.

Judges:

Lord Drummond Yound

Citations:

[2012] ScotCS CSIH – 100, 2013 GWD 3-104, [2012] CSIH 100, 2013 Rep LR 30, 2013 SLT 153

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945

Citing:

At Outer House – Jackson v Murray SCS 14-Jun-2012
Outer House – (Opinion) The pursuer child came out of a school bus and ran into the road behind it, being hit by a car driven by the defender. The court was asked as to the proprotions of responsibility.
Held: The pursuer was 90% responsible. . .

Cited by:

At Inner House – 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.

Scotland, Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.468833

McGlinchey v General Motors UK: SCS 4 Dec 2012

Citations:

[2012] ScotCS CSIH – 91

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

Scotland

Cited by:

Cited – Love v Halfords Ltd QBD 8-Apr-2014
The claimant had purchased a new bicycle from the defendants who also maintained it. Several months later, the steerer tube broke causing an accident and severe injury. The cycle had been finally assembled by the defendant after importation, but . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.466809

Karl Andrew Whyte v Redland Aggregates Limited: CA 27 Nov 1997

The appellant dived into a disused gravel pit and struck his head on an obstruction on the floor of the pit. The Court dismissed his appeal that he was not entitled to damages.
Held: ‘In my judgment, the occupier of land containing or bordered by the river, the seashore, the pond or the gravel pit, does not have to warn of uneven surfaces below the water. Such surfaces are by their nature quite likely to be uneven. Diving where you cannot see the bottom clearly enough to know that it is safe to dive is dangerous unless you have made sure, by reconnaissance or otherwise, that the diving is safe ie. that there is adequate depth at the place where you choose to dive. In those circumstances, the dangers of there being an uneven surface in an area where you cannot plainly see the bottom are too plain to require a specific warning and, accordingly, there is no such duty to warn (see Lord Shaw in Glasgow Corporation v Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44, 60. There was no trap here on the judge’s finding. There was just an uneven surface, as one would expect to find in a disused gravel pit.’

Judges:

Henry LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2842

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – Glasgow Corporation v Taylor HL 18-Nov-1921
A father brought an action for damages for the death of his son who had eaten poisonous berries growing in one of the defenders’ public parks. The plants were easily accessible from a children’s play area and it was said that the defender had a duty . .

Cited by:

Cited – Tomlinson v Congleton Borough Council and others HL 31-Jul-2003
The claimant dived into a lake, severely injuring himself. The council appealed liability, arguing that it owed him no duty of care under the Act since he was a trespasser. It had placed warning signs to deter swimmers.
Held: The council’s . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.143241

Quinn v Ministry of Defence: CA 28 Nov 1997

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2865, [1998] PIQR P387

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – 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.

Armed Forces, Personal Injury

Updated: 12 November 2022; Ref: scu.143264

Wills v Entwistle and Spruce: CA 12 Nov 1997

The claimant was a passenger in a car driven by the first defendant. He was injured when the driver turned right at traffic lights, in front of a van approaching. The traffic lights were at green for both vehicles. The question was as to the possible liability of the driver of the van. The judge had found that the first defendant was unlikely to have indicated to turn right, but that the van had accelerated. Had the driver been paying proper attention he could have avoided the accident, and the van driver had been found to be 20% responsible.
Held: There had been no evidence before the judge to found his assessment that thevan had not already entered the junction by the time the first defendant turned across his path. There was therefore no basis for finding contributory negligence on the van driver’s part, and the van driver’s appeal succeeded.

Judges:

Roch, Thorpe, Buxton LJJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2701

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 10 November 2022; Ref: scu.143100

Cleightonhills v Bembridge Marine Ltd and Others: TCC 5 Dec 2012

The claimant was very severely injured falling through a grating at premises occupied by his employer, the first defendant. The employer now sought a contribution from those involved in the design and construction of the building.

Judges:

Akenhead J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3449 (TCC)

Links:

Bailii

Personal Injury, Negligence

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.466563

Barnes v Stockton-On-Tees Borough Council: CA 29 Oct 1997

The claimant was injured at work at a swimming pool. As he and other members of staff tidied away a wet inflatable slide, he slipped and fell, suffering serious injury.
Held: ‘it was necessary for the employers to have laid down a system to this extent: they should have warned their employees about the potential hazard of standing on the wet slide to remove the ropes attached to it so long as the air hose was still underneath it. That, it seems to me, was the hazard. I know that in this particular case the work had been done for many years and no accident had occurred; but of course that is usually the case. However, it does seem to me that there was inevitably a potential risk if men and women were treading on a wet, slippery piece of plastic to pull it out of the water and beneath that plastic, but invisible to the naked eye at this point, there was the air hose.’ Steps could have been taken to ensure the hose was put away before the slide. The appeal succeeded, and the defendant was responsible, but the plaintiff was 50% contributorily negligent.

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2594

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – General Cleaning Contractors Ltd v Christmas HL 1953
It is the duty of the employer to consider the situation, devise a suitable system and instruct his employees what they must do and to provide appropriate equipment. In leaving it to individual workmen to take precautions against an obvious danger, . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142993

Griffin v Mersey Regional Ambulance: CA 8 Oct 1997

A driver who had crossed through a green traffic light but had collided with an ambulance was 60 per cent contributorily negligent. He had failed to hear the ambulance, had failed to see it, and had ignored unusal driving of other motorists.
Held: ‘In my judgment, the general approach of the judge below was entirely correct. He rightly identified the duty upon the defendants’ driver crossing this junction against the red light, as a high or heavy one, but equally rightly he recognised a duty of care upon the plaintiff beyond that of merely taking reasonable steps to avoid colliding with any vehicle crossing on red which he happened to see or otherwise be aware of. Rejecting, as I do, the application here of what is suggested to be the absolute rule in favour of traffic crossing a junction on green established in Joseph Eva Ltd v Reeves, it follows that, in my judgment, the appellant’s argument that there was no scope here for any finding of contributory negligence fails.’ The court emphasised that the nature of the duty owed by drivers crossing on green, in circumstances where emergency vehicles are crossing on red, is illuminated by regulation 33(2) of the 1994 Regulations. Simon Brown LJ also referred to rule 76 of the Highway Code providing: ‘Look and listen for ambulances . . or other emergency vehicles with flashing blue lights or sirens. Make room for them to pass (if necessary by moving to the side of the road and stopping) but do not endanger other road users.’

Judges:

Simon Brown LJ, Rober Walker LJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2441, [1998] PIQR 44

Statutes:

Traffic Signs And General Directions Order 1994 (1994 No 1519)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Joseph Eva Ltd v Reeves CA 1938
An accident occurred when a police vehicle went through traffic lights at green, but on the wrong side of the road.
Held: A driver crossing through traffic lights at green owes no duty to traffic entering the crossing in disobedience to the . .
Cited – Director of Public Prosecutions v Harris QBD 16-Mar-1994
The defence of necessity will be available only in exceptional circumstances even for police drivers driving in pursuit of a suspect. The care due from the driver of an emergency vehicle crossing a junction against red lights is specifically . .
Cited – Davis v Hassan 1967
All cases calling for attribution of liaibility where an emergency vehicle is in collision with another vehicle fall to be decided on their own facts. . .

Cited by:

Cited – Purdue v Devon Fire and Rescue Service CA 9-Oct-2002
The claimant was severely injured when, as he emerged through traffic lights as they turned green. He was in a collision with a fire engine driving in response to an emergency call-out. The driver of the fire engine said the claimant should have . .
Cited – Craggy v Chief Constable of Cleveland Police CA 6-Oct-2009
The claimant was driving his fire engine on an emergency call. The defendant’s constable was similarly engaged. It was in the early hours, and they each went through the traffic junction. They crashed and the judge held both drivers negligent to the . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142839

Sewell v Electrolux Limited: CA 8 Oct 1997

There had been an accident at work the claimant suffered substantial back pain and the recorder had to decide whether it was caused by the accident or by a pre-existing condition. Orthopaedic surgeons gave conflicting evidence. Unlike the master in the present case, the recorder did not even summarise the expert evidence (let alone seek to analyse its strengths and weaknesses) and, after a brief reference to the notes of the claimant’s GP, he announced that, in relation to this issue, the claimant had failed to discharge the burden of proof. This court held that the recorder had abdicated his duty to make findings and, in the words of Hutchison L.J., ‘to address and resolve the central issue and such of the subsidiary issues as it was necessary to resolve to decide that central issue.’ A Judge had a duty to make finding on conflicting medical evidence; he was wrong to rely on burden of proof alone.

Citations:

Times 07-Nov-1997, Gazette 22-Oct-1997, Times 22-Oct-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 2443

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Stephens and Another v Cannon and Another CA 14-Mar-2005
The claimants had purchased land from the defendants. The contract was conditional on a development which did not take place. The master had been presented with very different valuations of the property.
Held: The master was not entitled to . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142841

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 planning system is a regulatory system as envisaged in X (Minors), such that there should be no private right of action for a breach of statutory duty. The claim failed.

Judges:

Potter, Brooke LJJ

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2247, [1997] PIQR P488

Statutes:

Town and Country Planning Act 1990 29, Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part III, Public Health Act 1936 91

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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 – 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 . .
Cited – Sion v Hampstead Heath Authority CA 1994
A young man was injured in a motor-cycle accident and was taken to the defendant’s hospital. His father attended to him at his bedside for fourteen days, watching him deteriorate in health, fall into a coma and die. The father alleged that the staff . .
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 – Marc Rich and Co Ag and Others v Bishop Rock Marine Co Ltd and Others HL 6-Jul-1995
A surveyor acting on behalf of the classification society had recommended that after repairs specified by him had been carried out a vessel, the Nicholas H, should be allowed to proceed. It was lost at sea.
Held: The marine classification . .
Cited – Buxton v Minister of Housing and Local Government 1961
The planning functions of a local authority are exercised in the public interest. Salmon J said: ‘The scheme of the Town and Country Planning Legislation, in my judgment, is to restrict development for the benefit of the public at large and not to . .
Cited – Stringer v Ministry of Housing and Local Government 1970
The material considerations to be allowed for by the local authority in exercising its planning functions are considerations of a planning nature, ‘all considerations relating to the use and development of land are considerations which may, in a . .
Cited – Stovin v Wise, Norfolk County Council (Third Party) HL 24-Jul-1996
Statutory Duty Does Not Create Common Law Duty
The mere existence of statutory power to remedy a defect cannot of itself create a duty of care to do so. A highway authority need not have a duty of care to highway users because of its duty to maintain the highway. The two stage test ‘involves . .
Cited – Ryeford Homes v Seven Oaks District Council 1989
The planning function is exercised by a local authority on behalf of the public at large and not for private individuals. . .
Cited – Tidman v Reading Borough Council QBD 4-Nov-1994
The plaintiff wanted to sell his land. The purchaser wished to know the planning status and prospects for the land. The local authority published a leaflet encouraging those interested to seek guidance from the authority’s planning officers. The . .
Cited – Hedley Byrne and Co Ltd v Heller and Partners Ltd HL 28-May-1963
Banker’s Liability for Negligent Reference
The appellants were advertising agents. They were liable themselves for advertising space taken for a client, and had sought a financial reference from the defendant bankers to the client. The reference was negligent, but the bankers denied any . .
Cited – Welton, Welton v North Cornwall District Council CA 17-Jul-1996
The defendant authority appealed a finding that it was liable in negligence from the conduct of one of its environmental health officers. The plaintiff had set out to refurbish and open a restaurant. He said the officer gave him a list of things he . .
Cited – Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office HL 6-May-1970
A yacht was damaged by boys who had escaped from the supervision of prison officers in a nearby Borstal institution. The boat owners sued the Home Office alleging negligence by the prison officers.
Held: Any duty of a borstal officer to use . .
Cited – Henderson v Merrett Syndicates Ltd HL 25-Jul-1994
Lloyds Agents Owe Care Duty to Member; no Contract
Managing agents conducted the financial affairs of the Lloyds Names belonging to the syndicates under their charge. It was alleged that they managed these affairs with a lack of due careleading to enormous losses.
Held: The assumption of . .
Cited – Anns and Others v Merton London Borough Council HL 12-May-1977
The plaintiff bought her apartment, but discovered later that the foundations were defective. The local authority had supervised the compliance with Building Regulations whilst it was being built, but had failed to spot the fault. The authority . .

Cited by:

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

Nuisance, Personal Injury, Planning, Local Government

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142644

Oliver v Cox (T/a Focus Service Station): CA 24 Jul 1997

The claimant sought leave to appeal against the refusal of an award of special damages. The claim had mounted spectacularly, but he had failed to provide evidence as directed to support the claim.
Held: Even at the time of the application, the claimant had still not complied with the order, but denied it: ‘the Judge was perfectly entitled to regard the breach of the unless order as of sufficient seriousness to warrant the imposition of the sanction of dismissal. He did not proceed immediately to take that view. He correctly looked at the further attempt made to cure the defect, but he was satisfied it was insufficient. He gave the plaintiff every opportunity to seek the further indulgence of the court by seeking an extension of time, but, as he pointed out, there was no summons issued by the plaintiffs in which they sought such an extension of time. There was no affidavit to explain their failures, even though they were clearly capable of filing affidavits.’

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2184

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Hytec Information Systems Limited v Council of City of Coventry CA 4-Dec-1996
The Court directed that unless particulars were served by a specified date the defendant’s claim should be struck out. The defendant served some particulars but it was decided that the defendant had deliberately flouted the unless order and its . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142581

Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons: CA 16 Jul 1997

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 2123

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – 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 by:

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

Personal Injury

Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142520

Johnson v Ministry of Defence and Another: CA 21 Nov 2012

The claimant said that he had been exposed him to excessive noise during the course of his employment, causing his deafness. He noticed his hearing problems in 2001. He was also aware that exposure to noise could cause hearing loss, but did not associate his own hearing problems with exposure to noise in earlier years. In 2006 a doctor attributed his hearing difficulties to ageing. In 2009 J saw a consultant who advised that he had noise induced hearing loss. He then issued proceedings. The trial judge dismissed J’s claim on limitation grounds.
Held: His appeal failed. A reasonable person in his position would have been curious about the cause of his deafness. He would have consulted his general practitioner. The doctor would probably have asked him about his employment history. This would have led to possible attribution of the claimant’s deafness to exposure to excessive noise at work. Allowing a year or so for consideration, J was fixed with constructive knowledge about the possible cause of his deafness by the end of 2002.

Judges:

Hallett, Etherton LJJ, Dame Janet Smith

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1505, [2013] PIQR P7

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1980 11 14

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Collins v Secretary of State for Business Innovation and Skills and Others CA 23-May-2014
The claimant appealed against rejection of his claim for personal injury which had been rejected on basis that it was out of time. He had contracted cancer in 2002, but had recovered. He later came to attribute this to exposure to asbestos at work . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465943

Richards v London Borough of Bromley: CA 16 Nov 2012

Appeal against dismissal of claim for personal injury. The claimant had been a child hurt in an accident in the playground at a school for which the respondent was responsible.

Judges:

Maurica Kay LJ VP, Munby J

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1476

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465834

Raggett v The Society of Jesus Trust 1929 for Roman Catholic Purposes and Another: QBD 9 Nov 2012

The claimant sought damages having suffered sexual abuse while a child at a school run by the defendants. He had gone on to qualify as a solicitor and to work with a series of large firms.
Held: Though he had undoubtedly suffered, and done less well at school for the abuse, there was no real sign that his subsequent career had been adversely affected, and the court found that his social drinking and drugtaking was intermittent and not connected with the abuse. He did however suffer the narcissistic personality traits, and sexual dysfunction.
The damages or pain and suffering were set at andpound;40,000, with no award for loss of earnings.

Judges:

Swift J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 3132 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465700

Davies and Others v Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change: CA 25 Oct 2012

The claimants sought leave to bring cases in negligence in respect of their working conditions in coal mines between 1954 and 1994 which, they said resulted in osteoarthritis of the knee. The claims were well outside the standard limitation period.

Judges:

Mummery, Hallett, Tomlinson LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1380

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Limitation Act 1939

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.465362

Silverton v Goodall and Motor Insurance Bureau: CA 26 Mar 1997

Sir Ralph Gibson explained the historical development of the Motor Insurers Bureau describing it as ‘a novel piece of extra statutory machinery’.

Judges:

Sir Ralph Gibson

Citations:

[1997] EWCA Civ 1363, [1997] PIQR 451

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Horton v Sadler and Another HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimant had been injured in a road traffic accident for which the defendant was responsible in negligence. The defendant was not insured, and so a claim was to be made against the MIB. The plaintiff issued proceedings just before the expiry of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Road Traffic, Insurance, Personal Injury

Updated: 06 November 2022; Ref: scu.141759

Chaudhari v British Airways Plc: CA 16 Apr 1997

The passenger injured himself as he fell from an aeroplane chair because of pre-existing injury.
Held: He had no claim under the Convention. The falling of a semi-paralysed person whilst he was trying to get to his feet to go to the lavatory did not constitute an accident. It had not been an ‘accident causing injury’ within the Convention. Leggatt LJ said: ”accident’ is not to be construed as including any injuries caused by the passenger’s particular, personal and peculiar reaction to the normal operation of the aircraft’ and ‘what befell Mr Chaudhari was not caused by any unexpected or unusual event external to him but, but by his own personal, particular and peculiar reaction to the normal operation of the aircraft. As the judge said, he fell as the result of his pre-existing medical condition’.

Judges:

Leggatt LJ

Citations:

Times 07-May-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1413, CCRTI 96/0229/G

Statutes:

Warsaw Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules regarding International Air Transport 1929 Art 17

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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

Cited by:

Cited – Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation HL 8-Dec-2005
The appellants had suffered deep vein thrombosis whilst travelling on long haul air flights. The defendants said that their liability was limited because the injuries were not accidents.
Held: The claimants’ appeal failed. The definition of . .
Cited – Barclay v British Airways plc CC 27-Feb-2008
(Oxford County Court) The claimant slipped as she boarded an aircraft and sought damages for injuries to her knee. Her claim was brought under the Convention. The defendant denied that the injury occurred as the result of an accident, saying that an . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Transport

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.78998

Smith and Others v The Ministry of Defence: CA 19 Oct 2012

The mother of a soldier claimed after he had died in an attack while serving in Iraq. She asserted that if he had had proper equipment his life would not have been.
Held: Claims arising from the deaths of soldiers on active service abroad alleging breach of the right to life in article 2 of the Convention fell outside the United Kingdom’s jurisdiction under the Convention. However claims in negligence for failing to provide safe equipment and technology to serving soldiers who suffered death or injury would be justiciable here.

Judges:

Lord Neuberger PSC, Moses, Rimer LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1365, [2013] HRLR 2, [2012] WLR(D) 281, [2013] 1 All ER 778, [2013] 2 WLR 27, [2013] PIQR P3

Links:

Bailii, WLRD

Statutes:

European Convention on Human Rights 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Armed Forces, Personal Injury, Human Rights, Negligence

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.465045

Welsh v Parnianzadeh (T/A Southern Fried Chicken): CA 10 Dec 2004

The respondent had claimed in damages after an alleged personal injury sustained at the premises of the claimant. After several procedural failures, the claim was struck out, but on appeal, it was ordered: ‘The appellant’s appeal is thus dismissed but the case is to proceed with the following directions.’
Held: The court recited the procedural history. The defendant appealed saying that the order should be read to strike out the claim and no further. However, ‘the circuit judge’s approach was so confused and so defective that it is impossible to reach any sensible, and certainly any sound or reliable, conclusion as to the intention or effect of the order that she made.’ There had been repeated delay, but the defendant had not been prejudiced. The claim should proceed on the basis of the balance of the directions given.

Judges:

Lord Justice Peter Gibson Lord Justice Mance

Citations:

[2004] EWCA Civ 1832

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Flaxmann-Binns v Linconshire County Council CA 2004
A claimant who is reduced to a claim which would perforce be on a percentage basis for loss of chance against her legal advisers is not only suffering a real loss in the sense of being caused further delay and expense, but is also suffering a real . .
Cited – Hansom and others v E Rex Makin and Wright CA 18-Dec-2003
The court considered a strike out application.
Held: Although there might be many cases where the possibility or otherwise of a fair trial is highly important to the exercise of discretion under CPR 3.9. it does not follow that where a fair . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.222652

Jameson and Wyatt (Executors of the Estate of David Allen Jameson) v Central Electricity Generating Board and Babcock Energy Limited: CA 13 Feb 1997

Executors may sue for a dependency claim despite a full and final settlement having been made by the deceased.

Citations:

Times 25-Feb-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 1008

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Jameson and Wyatt (Executors of the Estate of David Allen Jameson) v Central Electricity Generating Board and Babcock Energy Limited 10-Mar-1995
The plaintiff claimed damages for mesothelioma. CEGB had provided a contractual indemnity in respect of damage or injury occurring before building works were taken over by a client in 1960. The question was whether a workman who died from . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Wills and Probate, Litigation Practice

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.141404

Houghton v British Coal Corporation: CA 28 Jan 1997

A payment into court was made which expressed itself to be ‘after the deduction of a sum which would reflect the amount of benefits the plaintiff would have to account for himself’. Such a deduction was proper.

Citations:

Times 13-Feb-1997, [1997] EWCA Civ 863

Statutes:

Rules of the Supreme Court Order 22 1 Form 23

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.141259

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 years from chronic fatigue syndrome, which manifested itself from time to time. The judge held that the shock of the accident reactivated this condition which was now in all probability permanent and that it was unlikely that the plaintiff would be able to return to full-time employment, and he awarded damages of pounds 162,153.
Held: Allowing the defendants’ appeal on the ground that psychiatric injury was not a foreseeable consequence of the accident. A claim for damages for pure nervous shock requires that the psychiatric injury should be a foreseeable result.

Citations:

Times 04-May-1994

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Applied – 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 by:

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

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 05 November 2022; Ref: scu.84537

Churchill Insurance Company Ltd v Fitzgerald and Wilkinson and Others: CA 24 Aug 2012

The court was asked whether, if the insured owner of a vehicle permits another, uninsured, to drive the car, carrying the owner, and through his negligence causes and accident in which the owner is injured, the insurer is bound to meet the owner’s claim by virtue of the 1988 Act.

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP, Etherton, Aikens LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1166

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Road Traffic Act 1988

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Insurance

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463723

Blair-Ford v CRS Adventures Ltd: QBD 13 Aug 2012

The claimant was very severely injured when throwing a wellington boot through his legs at an outdoor pursuits centre operated by the defendant. He had fallen onto his head. He asserted negligence, they said that an appropriate risk assessment had been undertaken, and that the injury could not reasonably have been foreseen.
Held: The claim failed.

Judges:

Globe J

Citations:

[2012] EWHC 2360 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Adventure Activity Centres (Young Persons’ Safety) Act 1995, Adventure Activities Licensing Regulations 2004

Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463641

SG v Hewitt: CA 2 Aug 2012

The claimant child was substantially injured at the negligence of the defendant. A pre-action offer of settlement was later made and, two years later, accepted. The parties now disputed liability for costs.

Judges:

Pill, Arden, Black LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1053

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.463426

Forward v Hendricks: CA 6 Dec 1996

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 1132, [1997] 2 All ER 395

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – 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 by:

Cited – Shapland v Palmer CA 23-Mar-1999
The plaintiff’s car was struck by a company car driven by the defendant in the course of her employment and she sought damages. Her action, against the employer, was struck out as late under the 1980 Act. She then commenced an action against the . .
Cited – Horton v Sadler and Another HL 14-Jun-2006
The claimant had been injured in a road traffic accident for which the defendant was responsible in negligence. The defendant was not insured, and so a claim was to be made against the MIB. The plaintiff issued proceedings just before the expiry of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.140999

Vernon v Bosley (3): CA 19 Dec 1996

The plaintiff claimed damages for acute stress after failing to rescue his two daughters in an accident caused by the defendant. After the accident, he became involved in family proceedings concerning custody of other children. Medical reports used in the children proceedings suggesting an improvement in his condition had not been disclosed to the court awarding the damages. This had been on counsel’s advice.
Held: The judge must be told of a change in the Plaintiff’s prognosis which had occurred after the medical evidence had been given. The court had a remaining discretion to admit such evidence. Counsel had a professional duty to make further disclosure where there was a risk that the court might be misled.
‘where the case has been conducted on the basis of certain material facts which are an essential part of the party’s case, in this case the plaintiff’s condition at trial and the prognosis, which were discovered before judgment to be significantly different, the court is not being misled by the failure of the defendant to put before it material of which she could or should have been aware, but by the failure of the plaintiff and his advisers to correct an incorrect appreciation which the court will otherwise have as a result of their conduct of this case hitherto.’ and ‘Where there is a danger that the court will be misled, it is the duty of counsel to advise his client that disclosure should be made. There is no reason to suppose that if Mr Vernon had been so advised in this case, he would not have accepted that advice. If the client refuses to accept the advice, then it is not as a rule for counsel to make the disclosure himself; but he can no longer continue to act.’

Judges:

Stuart-Smith LJ, Thorpe LJ, Evans LJ dissenting

Citations:

Times 19-Dec-1996, Gazette 29-Jan-1997, [1998] 1 FLR 304, [1996] EWCA Civ 1217, [1997] 3 WLR 683, [1997] RTR 275, (1997) 35 BMLR 174, [1999] QB 18, [1997] 1 All ER 614, [1997] Fam Law 476, [1997] PIQR P326

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

See Also – Vernon v Bosley (2) CA 29-Mar-1996
The defendant had been driving the plaintiff’s daughters, but negligently caused an accident from which they died. The plaintiff was called to the accident, and claimed to have suffered post traumatic stress. The defendant said that the effect was . .
See Also – Vernon v Bosley (1) QBD 1993
The court discussed the extent to which a judge had control over the admission of otherwise admissible evidence: ‘A point comes at which literal admissibility has to yield to the constraints of proportionality . . such proportionality may in any one . .
See Also – Vernon v Bosley QBD 5-Aug-1994
The Judge may impose a schedule for the examination of witnesses if there is a severe overrun of the case at the hearing. . .
See Also – Vernon v Bosley (1) CA 8-Apr-1994
Though the judge had a right to exclude admissible evidence, it remained a balancing exercise which came down to being a matter of his discretion. Evidence might not be admitted which would involve ‘inconvenience, expense, delay or oppression’. The . .
Cited – Tombling v Universal Bulb Co CA 1951
Denning LJ said: ‘The duty of counsel to his client in a civil case – or in defending an accused person – is to make every honest endeavour to succeed. He must not, of course, knowingly mislead the Court, either on the facts or on the law, but, . .
Cited – Mulholland v Mitchell HL 1971
The House was asked whether to re-open an assessment of damages where there had been a very marked change in the injured person’s situation shortly after the trial. There was no suggestion of fraud. The Court of Appeal had decided to admit the fresh . .
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, Litigation Practice

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.90152

McCaffery v Datta; Datta and St Anne’s Nursing Home Limited: CA 11 Dec 1996

Costs payable to the plaintiff after an award which was greater than the payment in even though it might be less than the sum of benefits which might be recouped.

Citations:

Gazette 22-Jan-1997, Times 09-Jan-1997, [1996] EWCA Civ 1179, [1997] 1 WLR 870

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Social Security Administration Act 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury, Costs

Updated: 04 November 2022; Ref: scu.141047

Cox v Ergo Versicherung Ag and Another: CA 19 Jul 2012

The deceased army officer had been injured in a road traffic accident in Germany. His widow brought proceedings in the UK, anticipating a better damages award than might be available in Germany. She had assigned certain elements of her claim to the Ministry of Defence in return for the payment of benefits. She now disputed the effect of the assignment, and appealed against a finding that it was valid and binding.
Held: The appeal failed. The assignment was governed by German law, though it contained no express choice of law.

Judges:

Maurice Kay VP CA, Etherton LJJ, Dame Janet Smith

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 1001

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Contracts (Applicable) Law Act 1990 812(1)

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

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

Personal Injury, European, Damages, Contract

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.462968

Rust-Andrews v First Tier Tribunal (Social Entitlement Chamber) and Another: CA 19 Dec 2011

The claimant appealed against rejection of her appeal against a decision as to compensation under the scheme.

Judges:

Carnwath, Stanlet Burnton LJJ, Sir Robin Jacob

Citations:

[2011] EWCA Civ 1548, [2012] AACR 33

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Damages, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.450116

Laverton v Kiapasha (T/A Takeaway Supreme): CA 19 Nov 2002

Slipping on wet floor of takeaway – claimant had too much to drink – wearing high heels.
Held: ‘There is a distinction between particular dangers such as greasy spillages, which it is reasonable to expect a shopkeeper to deal with straightaway, and the general problem posed by walked in water on a wet night, which can never be completely avoided. ‘ and ‘it was not reasonable to expect the shopkeeper to ensure that the mat was in place and mop the floor often enough and efficiently enough to prevent its being wet, even significantly or considerably so. To suggest otherwise is a counsel of perfection imposing a near strict liability which the law does not at present do. I would therefore allow the appeal and dismiss the claim in its entirety.’

Citations:

[2002] EWCA Civ 1656

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Occupiers’ Liability Act 1957 2

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Cited – Ward v Tesco Stores Ltd CA 1976
The claimant slipped on the contents of a yoghurt pot which had spilled onto the floor of the supermarket. The defendants gave evidence of frequent inspection and sweeping of the supermarket floor with instructions to the staff to clear up spillages . .
Cited – Turner v Arding and Hobbs Ltd CA 1949
The court described the duty of a shopkeeper to take care for his customers: ‘The duty of a shopkeeper in this class of case is well-established. It may be said to be a duty to use reasonable care to see that the shop floor, on which people are . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.188962

Armstrong and others v British Coal Corporation: CA 28 Nov 1996

Liability for vibration white finger damage was foreseeable from 1973, but liability began in 1975 when precautions became available against the consequences and so the employer was able to protect his employees.

Citations:

Times 06-Dec-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 1049

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

Cited – Baker v Quantum Clothing Group Ltd and Others SC 13-Apr-2011
The court was asked as to the liability of employers in the knitting industry for hearing losses suffered by employees before the 1989 Regulations came into effect. The claimant had worked in a factory between 1971 and 2001, sustaining noise induced . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Personal Injury, Limitation, Health and Safety

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.140916

A B and others v Tameside and Glossop Health Authority and Trafford Health Authority: CA 13 Nov 1996

The choice of the telephone as a means of alerting and re-assuring people, who had received treatment from a health worker later found to be HIV+, was proper. The was no breach of a duty care, even though some people called had suffered distress: ‘once the defendants had decided to inform their patients at all, they were under a duty to take such steps to inform them as were reasonable, having regard both to the foreseeable risk that some of them might suffer psychiatric injury (or any existing psychiatric injury might be materially aggravated) upon receipt of the information ‘ and ‘the judge has to perform the familiar role of considering the factual evidence carefully, listening to the expert evidence, and forming a view as to whether in all the circumstances these public health authorities fell below the standards reasonably to be expected of them when they selected their preferred method of communicating the information to the patients.’

Judges:

Brooke LJ

Citations:

Gazette 04-Dec-1996, Times 27-Nov-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 938, [1996] 35 BMRLR 39

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Cited by:

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

Negligence, Professional Negligence, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.140805

McCaffery v Datta; Datta and St Anne’s Nursing Home Limited: CA 14 Nov 1996

The plaintiff nurse injured her back lifting a patient. She appealed against a finding that she was one third contributorily negligent.
Held: The appeal failed. The judge had correctly applied the law in finding contributory negligence, and as to the amount that was a matter for him.

Citations:

[1996] EWCA Civ 961

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.140828

Berryman v Hounslow London Borough Council: CA 20 Nov 1996

No damages were to be awarded for a tenant’s injury suffered whilst climbing the stairs when the lift had not been repaired.

Citations:

Times 18-Dec-1996, [1996] EWCA Civ 1001

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Landlord and Tenant, Land, Housing, Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.78369

Balls v Reeve and Another: QBD 26 Mar 2021

Claim for damages against the personal representatives of Mr Sidney Thurlow deceased arising out his employment in Mr Thurlow’s construction business (‘ST Thurlow’) between 1954 and 1983. Mr Balls was employed as a carpenter. During the course of his employment, it is alleged that he worked regularly with asbestos, particularly during the construction of houses, bungalows and farm buildings in Suffolk.

Judges:

David Pittaway QC (Sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court)

Citations:

[2021] EWHC 751 (QB)

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Personal Injury

Updated: 03 November 2022; Ref: scu.660806

Frost and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire and Others: CA 31 Oct 1996

The distinction normally made between primary and secondary victims claiming damages for shock in witnessing a terrible event does not apply to employees who were obliged by their contract to be present.

Citations:

Times 06-Nov-1996, [1996] EWHC CA 173

Links:

Bailii

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

Appeal from – Frost and Others v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire QBD 3-Jul-1995
Trained rescuers have to be assumed to have a higher distress threshold because of their training and experience, and if a claim for psychiatric injury is to be made out, they must show some exceptional and particular situation to justify the claim. . .

Cited by:

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

Personal Injury, Damages

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.80695

Harrison v Jagged Globe Ltd: CA 29 May 2012

The defendant tour operator appealed against a finding that it was liable after the claimant had been injured while climbing in Ecuador on a tour it had arranged, saying that it had been ‘self-led’ by the client Sir Ranulph Fiennes. The claimant had fallen when engaging in a stunt arranged for filming.

Judges:

Laws, itchford, Lloyd-Jones LJJ

Citations:

[2012] EWCA Civ 835

Links:

Bailii

Statutes:

Package Travel, Package Holidays and Package Tours Regulations 1992

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Negligence, Personal Injury, Consumer

Updated: 01 November 2022; Ref: scu.460540