The defendants were to pay damages after failing to provide an adequate software package. The claimants included a claim for wasted time by their directors and staff in struggling with the inadequacies of the software provided.
Held: The claim was allowed.
The court cited Tate and Lyle, but said that the court did have some evidence of the amount of time spent by the directors and staff, albeit only in the form of a reconstruction from memory: ‘I cannot and do not say, in the absence of records there is to be no recovery.’
The court rejected a suggestion of the defendants that there were relevant distinctions between income-producing and ‘back office’ employees or indeed between short periods and long periods of diverted time. ‘In all cases, the claimants were paying for time which was to be a benefit to them and they lost the benefit of that time’. The judge had accepted the observation of the claimants’ forensic accountant that ‘every employer values each employee at more than the employee is paid, otherwise there is no point in employing him.’
Judges:
Judge Bowsher QC
Citations:
[2001] All ER (D) 83
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – Tate and Lyle Distribution v Greater London Council 1982
The defendants were liable to the claimants for having failed to dredge silt which they had caused to be accumulated when constructing new piers for the Woolwich ferry and which had obstructed the claimants’ use of their barge moorings. The result . .
Cited by:
Cited – Aerospace Publishing Ltd and Another v Thames Water Utilities Ltd CA 11-Jan-2007
A substantial private archive of valuable books had been damaged when the defendant’s water mains burst. The court was asked to assess the value.
Held: The water company’s appeal failed save to a small extent. The articles were of substantial . .
Appeal from – Horace Holman Group Ltd v Sherwood International Group Ltd CA 7-Feb-2002
. .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages
Updated: 10 May 2022; Ref: scu.247680
