The appeal court should not interfere with an award under for pain, suffering and loss of amenity, unless it is manifestly too high or too low or it can be shown that the judge has erred in principle in relation to some element that goes to make up the award. The award of the cost of care is to provide for the reasonable and proper care of the plaintiff or claimant, and the court must consider whether it is sufficient to enable the plaintiff, among other things, to make reasonable recompense to the relative. So, in cases where the relative has given up gainful employment to look after the plaintiff, it is natural that the plaintiff would not wish the relative to lose out and the court would award sufficient to enable the plaintiff to achieve that result. The ceiling would be the commercial rate. The mother was providing care. The court recognises that part of the reasonable and proper cost of providing for the plaintiff’s needs is to enable her to make a present, or series of presents, to her mother.
Lord Justice O’Connor held that: ‘In cases where the relative has given up gainful employment to look after the plaintiff, I would regard it as natural that the plaintiff would not wish the relative to be the loser and the court would award sufficient to allow the plaintiff to achieve that result. The ceiling would be the commercial rate.’
Judges:
Lord Justice O’Connor
Citations:
[1986] 1 All ER 332, [1985] EWCA Civ 18
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons CA 19-Mar-2003
Both parties appealed against the lower court’s orders. The claimant, a child was injured by a car driven by the defendant, who had been found 25% responsible. The claimant had suffered head injuries, and subsequently epilepsy.
Held: The award . .
Cited – Giambrone and others v 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 – Mills v British Rail Engineering Ltd CA 1992
Defendants appealed an award of andpound;8,000 to the widow of a man who died of lung cancer, for her caring for him in his last months. She claimed two hours’ services each day for the first two months of his illness, increasing to three hours, and . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Personal Injury, Damages
Updated: 29 May 2022; Ref: scu.262660
