Links: Home | swarblaw - law discussions

swarb.co.uk - law index


These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases.  














Personal Injury - From: 2003 To: 2003

This page lists 91 cases, and was prepared on 02 April 2018.

 
Sayers v Cambridgeshire County Council [2003] IRLR 29
2003


Personal Injury
Complaints of an excessive workload and of stress on their own were not a sufficient basis to found liability for stress induced personal injury.
1 Citers


 
Barlow v Borough of Broxbourne [2003] EWHC 50 QB
2003
QBD
Gray J
Employment, Personal Injury
The claimant sought damages alleging having been bullied and harassed at work. Held: The questions to be determined when considering whether alleged bullying and harassment give rise to a potential liability in negligence were: "(i) whether the claimant has established that the conduct complained of in the Particulars of Claim took place and, if so, whether it amounted to bullying or harassment in the ordinary connotation of those terms. In addressing this question it is the cumulative effect of the conduct which has to be considered rather than the individual incidents relied on;
(ii) did the person or persons involved in the victimisation or bullying know, or ought they reasonably to have known, that their conduct might cause the claimant harm;
(iii) could they, by the exercise of reasonable care, have taken steps which would have avoided that harm and
(iv) were their actions so connected with their employment as to render the defendant vicariously responsible for them. "
1 Citers


 
Akers and others v Motor Insurers' Bureau and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 18
14 Jan 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Road Traffic, Negligence

[ Bailii ]
 
Wallis v Balfour Beatty Rail Maintenance Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 72
16 Jan 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Alex Armstrong v Brake Brothers (Frozen Foods0 Ltd [2003] ScotSC 2
17 Jan 2003
ScSf
Sheriff Principal EF Bowen
Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Roe v Sheffield City Council and others Times, 24 January 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 1; [2004] QB 653; [2003] BLGR 389; [2003] 2 WLR 848
17 Jan 2003
CA
Pill, Sedley, Hale LJJ
Transport, Local Government, Personal Injury
The claimant sought damages after his car was involved in an accident when a wheel struck a part of a tramway standing proud of the road surface. The defendant argued that they were excused liability by the 1988 Act, incorporating the effects of the 1870 Act. Held: The 1988 Act did not provide a full statement of the defendant's liability so as to exclude their liability under the 1980 Act. The standard of maintenance was defined by reference to safety. A small difference may be safe, but the rail stood sufficiently proud of the roadway to lift the tyre from the roadway and break its grip. The 1988 Act shifted responsibility to the tramway operator within the initial 12 months of operation.
Tramways Act 1870 25 28 - South Yorkshire Light Rail Transit Act 1988 - Highways Act 1980 41
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
KR and others v Bryn Alyn Community (Holdings) Ltd and Another Times, 17 February 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 85; [2003] QB 1441; [2003] Fam Law 482; [2004] 2 All ER 716; [2003] 1 FLR 1203; [2003] Lloyd's Rep Med 175; [2003] 3 WLR 107; [2003] 1 FCR 385
12 Feb 2003
CA
Lord Justice Auld, Lord Justice Waller, Lord Justice Mantell
Limitation, Personal Injury
The respondent appealed decisions by the court to allow claims for personal injury out of time. The claims involved cases of sexual abuse inflicted by its employees going back over many years. Held: The judge had misapplied the test laid down in Stebbings. The court of appeal had not previously considered how to apply its section 33 discretion to cases involving continuing psychological damage. Each case had to be assessed individually, but the length of time allowed to pass before an application was made was a significant factor. Once the court had used its discretion to extend the time allowed before the limitation period, it should be more cautious about leniency in any following period. The question was whether the claims could still be tried fairly as against the defendant. Such allegations were easy to make and difficult to refute, and the judge must bear in mind the possibility of exaggeration for financial gain. "The overall question is one of equity, namely, whether it would be 'equitable' to disapply the limitation provisions having regard to the balance of potential prejudice weighed with regard to all the circumstances of the case, including those specifically mentioned in s 33(3)."
Limitation Act 1980 14 33
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Matthews v Ministry of Defence; HL 13-Feb-2003 - Times, 14 February 2003; [2003] UKHL 4; [2003] 2 WLR 435; Gazette, 03 April 2003; [2003] 1 AC 1163; 14 BHRC 585; [2003] PIQR P24; [2003] UKHRR 453; [2003] ACD 42; [2003] ICR 247; [2003] 1 All ER 689; [2004] HRLR 2
 
Naylor v Volex Group Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 222
14 Feb 2003
CA

Health and Safety, Personal Injury

Control of Substances Hazardous to Health Regulations 1994 6 7(1)
[ Bailii ]
 
Barrow v Cosignia Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 249
18 Feb 2003
CA
Lord Phillips MR
Personal Injury, Damages
"While the case demonstrates confusion about principles, both of pleading and of the law of causation, it raises no issue of general, or indeed any, interest other than to the parties, and I hope that no-one will bother to report it. "
[ Bailii ]
 
Fletcher v The Commissioners of Public Works in Ireland [2003] 1 IR 465
21 Feb 2003


International, Personal Injury, Damages
(Irish Supreme Court)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Harvey v Northumberland County Council [2003] EWCA Civ 338
25 Feb 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Keen v Tayside Contracts Times, 27 March 2003; [2003] ScotCS 55
26 Feb 2003
OHCS
Lady Paton
Scotland, Personal Injury, Damages
The claimant sought damages for post traumatic stress disorder. He was a road worker instructed to attend by the defendant immediately after a terrible accident. Held: It was a classic case of nervous shock. He was not a rescuer, and nor had he faced any personal danger, nor been physically injured. The range of people who might claim as secondary victims had been extended, but not yet this far. The concept of secondary victim focussed on the way the injury occurred, not how it was caused or by whom.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Grace v Tanner [2003] EWCA Civ 354
27 Feb 2003
CA

Road Traffic, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Morris v Richards [2003] EWCA Civ 232
27 Feb 2003
CA
Mr Justice Keene Lord Justice Schiemann
Personal Injury, Damages

[ Bailii ]

 
 Donoghue v Folkestone Properties Limited; CA 27-Feb-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 231; Times, 10 March 2003; Gazette, 01 May 2003; [2003] 2 WLR 1138; [2003] QB 1008
 
Marchent v Allied Domecq Leisure Ltd [2003] EWHC 82 (QB)
28 Feb 2003
QBD

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Collins v Jones [2003] EWHC 187 (QB)
28 Feb 2003
QBD
The Hon Mr Justice Morland
Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Regina (E) v Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel Times, 17 March 2003
3 Mar 2003
CA
Woolf LCJ, Hale Latham LJJ
Personal Injury, Prisons
The claimant made a claim as regards a sexual assault committed against him in prison. The Panel refused the claim on the basis that he had consented. Held: A claim might succeed where the consent was vitiated in such circumstances as would leave the assault a criminal offence. The claimant was vulnerable and had been placed in a cell with a much older man accused of offences against other young men. F had groomed him for the offence. The question of consent should not be approached narrowly, but rather on a jury approach. Should the claimant properly be described as a victim. Submission was not the same as consent. In this case the claimant had the mental capacity to consent, but a simple question as to consent did not allow for his vulnerability. The Panel had not asked the correct questions, and the case was remitted to a different panel.
Sexual Offences Act 1956 15
1 Cites


 
Bankers Insurance Company Limited v Patrick South, Mark Ian Gardner [2003] EWHC 380 (QB)
7 Mar 2003
QBD
The Honourable Mr Justice Buckley
Insurance, Personal Injury, Consumer
The two defendants had been involved in a jet-ski accident on holiday in Europe. The claimant sought a declaration that it was not liable to indemnify its insured under the holiday insurance under which they travelled. The policy excluded liability for damages arising from ownership, or possession of water craft. The defendants alleged that the exclusion was unfair under the Regulations. Held: The policy was neither unfair nor worded unclearly, and was not affected by the Regulation. A jet ski is a water craft. It was asserted that the clause requiring immediate notification was unfair. This failed. Declaration granted.
Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994 3
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Richard Vowles v David Evans, and The Welsh Rugby Union Limited Times, 13 March 2003; Gazette, 22 May 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 318; [2003] ECC 24; [2003] 1 WLR 1607; [2003] PIQR P29
11 Mar 2003
CA
Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Clarke Lord Phillips M.R.
Personal Injury, Negligence
The claimant had been injured in a rugby match, and had recovered damages from the referee, who now appealed. Held: The relationship was proximate, and the injury reasonably forseeable, and if the referee failed to exercise reasonable care, liability could follow. The referee accepted a role of enforcing rules to minimise danger in a dangerous sport. Here the referee had failed to enforce rules intended to protect players, and it was a decision taken whilst play was stopped, not running play.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Moohan v City of Glasgow Council; OHCS 11-Mar-2003 - [2003] ScotCS 58; 2003 SLT 745
 
Griffiths v Vauxhall Motors Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 412
12 Mar 2003
CA
Clarke LJ
Personal Injury
The court considered the effect of the regulations: "Regulation 4 and indeed 5 are concerned with the physical condition of the equipment on the assumption that they will be properly operated by properly trained and instructed personnel." A risk assessment was relevant to the identification of what the employer should have done.
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1998 4 5
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Russell v Wincanton Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 504
13 Mar 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
McCrae v Chase International Express Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 505
14 Mar 2003
CA

Damages, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Pioneer Technology (UK) Ltd v Jowitt [2003] EWCA Civ 411
18 Mar 2003
CA

Employment, Insurance, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Williams v Devon County Council Times, 25 March 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 365
18 Mar 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Benefits, Damages
The claimant had recovered damages, but was ordered to pay costs since she had recovered less than was paid in. She appealed. Held: There were anomalies in the system with regard to the recoverable social security benefits. The sums recoverable were not reduced in line with any reduction for contributory negligence, benefits could be recovered for time periods for which no award was made, and the benefits could be set off against a wider range of sums. The calculation upon which the costs decision must therefore be made to reflect no more than the amount appropriate for the head of damages against which the benefits could be offset. There remained difficulties which the court should deal with within its discretion.
Civil Procedure Rules 36.20 - Social Security (Recovery of Benefits) Act 1997 8
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Willbye (By Her Mother and Next Friend) v Gibbons [2003] EWCA Civ 372
19 Mar 2003
CA
Lord Justice Kennedy Mr Justice Scott Baker
Personal Injury, Damages
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 of £80,000 for pain suffering and loss of amenity was not so wrong as to allow interference by the Court (Housecroft). The court increased the award to take into account the need for extra assistance if the appellant has children, or if she finds herself living alone, or even wanting to go on holiday alone, when assessing her need for future care. She should also receive the costs of the receivership at the court of protection.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Mirvahedy v Henley and another Times, 24 March 2003; [2003] UKHL 16; Gazette, 15 May 2003; [2003] 2 AC 491; [2003] RTR 26; [2003] PIQR P25; [2003] NPC 38; [2003] 2 WLR 882; [2003] 2 All ER 401
20 Mar 2003
HL
Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Nicholls
Animals, Road Traffic, Personal Injury
The defendants' horses escaped from the field, and were involved in an accident with the claimant's car. Held: The defendants were liable under section 2(2). To bolt was a characteristic of horses which was normal "in the particular circumstances", these being some sort of fright or other external stimulus. Section 2 places all animals into one of two categories by their species. Animals either belong to a dangerous species, or they do not. A keeper of an animal is liable for damage caused by his animal dependant upon the category. A dangerous species must meet two requirements, a) that it is not commonly domesticated here and b) that fully grown animals 'normally have such characteristics that they are likely, unless restrained, to cause severe damage or that any damage they may cause is likely to be severe'.
Lord Nicholls: "Take a large and heavy domestic animal such as a mature cow. There is a real risk that if a cow happens to stumble and fall onto someone, any damage suffered will be severe. This would satisfy requirement (a). . . But a cow's dangerousness in this regard may not fall within requirement (b). This dangerousness is due to a characteristic normally found in all cows at all times. The dangerousness results from their very size and weight. It is not due to a characteristic not normally found in cows 'except at particular times or in particular circumstances.'"
Animals Act 1971 2 6(2) 11
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Giullietta Galli-Atkinson v Seghal [2003] Lloyds Rep Med 285; [2003] EWCA Civ 697
21 Mar 2003
CA
Lord Justice Thorpe, Lord Justice Latham, Mr Justice Wilson
Damages, Personal Injury
The claimant's daughter was fatally injured in car accident, dying shortly after. The mother came upon the scene, witnessed a police cordon at the scene of the accident and was told of her death. She later saw the injuries at the mortuary and suffered psychiatric reaction. Held: Her appeal succeeded. The aftermath could be seen to include more than one component. The test was as to proximity. Latham LJ explained that the deceased's mother's visit to the mortuary could not be excluded from the events regarded as a part of the aftermath of the accident. Those events stretched from "the moment of the accident until the moment [the mother] left the mortuary". In this case there could be seen to be one unbroken chain of events between the discovery of the body and the events at the mortuary. An event might be made up of a number of components as could the aftermath "provided that the events alleged to constitute the aftermath retain sufficient proximity to the event".
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Sowden v Lodge [2003] EWHC 588 (QB)
25 Mar 2003
QBD

Damages, Personal Injury

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Glen and Other v Korean Airlines Company Ltd Times, 18 April 2003
28 Mar 2003
QBD
Simon J
Damages, Personal Injury, Transport
The claimant sought damages for personal injuries under the Act. The injuries were psychiatric, being suffered when they witnessed a crash from the ground. Held: Psychiatric injury is a recognised form of personal injury, and no statute excluded such claims, and nor was there any reason why they should be excluded from the statute. The law had changed since the earlier statute. However the normal requirements as to foreseeability and remoteness applied.
Civil Aviation Act 1982 76(2) - Air Navigation Act 1920
1 Cites


 
Agnew v Scott Lithgow J G Kincaid Ltd Kvaerner Govan Limited [2003] ScotCS 94; 2003 SCLR 426
1 Apr 2003
SCS
Lord Abernethy and Lady Cosgrove and Lord Marnoch
Personal Injury, Limitation
Common law three of peursuer's former employers for the loss, injury and damage said to have been suffered as a result of his working with vibrating tools in the course of his employment with them.
[ Bailii ]
 
Pearce v Lindfield and others [2003] EWCA Civ 647
1 Apr 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Damages

[ Bailii ]
 
Martin v McGuiness [2003] ScotCS 96
2 Apr 2003
OHCS
Lord Bonomy
Scotland, Evidence, Personal Injury, Human Rights
The pursuyer sought to have excluded evidence obtained unlawfully. He sought damages forr personal injuries. The defender had employed an enquiry agent who had taken films of him which he claimed infringed his rights to private and family life. Held: Behaviour such as that of the defender could infringe the pursuer's human rights, but the evidence could be admitted if there was a legitimate aim for obtaining and presenting the evidence. Any infringement had to remain proportionate. The presenter of a false case, himself would attempt to infringe the defenders right to a fair trial. A balance had to be struck. In this case the enquiries were reasonable and proportionate, and the results could be admitted.
European Convention on Human Rights 8
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Herring v Ministry of Defence; CA 10-Apr-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 528; Times, 11 April 2003; Gazette, 19 June 2003; [2004] 1 All ER 44
 
Croft v Broadstairs and St Peter's Town Council [2003] EWCA Civ 676
15 Apr 2003
CA
Potter LJ
Personal Injury, Employment
The claimant acted as the town clerk. After an unexpected letter about her conduct there were meetings and correspondence. Her initial shock and distress were so exacerbated that she was rendered incapable of work through depression. The triggering factor was not the work she was required to do but receipt of the letter which the council accepted would not have been written had it known of her psychiatric problems. The judge found for Mrs Croft. Held: The fact that two town councillors knew that Mrs Croft had been undergoing counselling was not enough to establish that the council knew of her psychiatric vulnerability. Potter LJ: that left the council in a position of employers who were entitled to expect ordinary robustness in Mrs Croft in an employment context, including disciplinary matters in which she had never been involved before. Her breakdown was not reasonably foreseeable.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Transco Plc v Griggs [2003] EWCA Civ 564
16 Apr 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

[ Bailii ]
 
A v Ministry of Defence and another Times, 16 May 2003; Gazette, 03 July 2003
16 Apr 2003
QBD
Bell J
Personal Injury, Negligence, Armed Forces
The claimant's father a member of the armed forces had been posted to Germany, and his wife, A's mother had gone with him. A had been born in Germany, but suffered injury at birth through the negligence of the doctor's appointed by the defendant English hospital. Held: Declarations that the defendant and the English hospitals with the duty of appointment of the German doctors were responsible were refused, and that action lay in Germany. The duty to make such an appointment was particular to the Armed Forces, but was limited to the exercise of due care in selection, and did not extend to a duty in respect of the treatment itself. The duty was not non-delegable.
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
National Association of Colliery Overmen, Deputies and Shot Firers, Regina (on the Application Of) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2003] EWHC 607 (Admin)
1 May 2003
Admn

Benefits, Personal Injury

Social Security Contributions Benefit Act 1992 108
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Young v Ministry of Defence [2003] EWCA Civ 817
2 May 2003
CA

Armed Forces, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Skerratt v Linfax Ltd (T/A Go Karting for Fun) [2003] EWCA Civ 695
6 May 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Limitation

Limitation Act 1980 33(3)(a)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Adams v Bracknell Forest Borough Council; CA 6-May-2003 - Times, 14 May 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 706; Gazette, 03 July 2003
 
Fytche v Wincanton Logistics Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 874; [2003] ICR 1582
12 May 2003
CA
Waller LJ
Health and Safety, Personal Injury
A milk lorry driver was issued with protective boots. Stuck in a snowstorm, he tried to dig himself out. The boots leaked and he suffered frostbite. Held: The compulsory element under the regulations is taken into account in the standard of care which the employer must observe to comply with his duty of care to the employees. The claimant recognised that he could not succeed in proving a breach of the duty of care, and his claim failed.
Waller LJ said: "I stress the standard of care will be a high one. Where the employer is asking the employee to wear particular footwear or clothing in place of the employee's own, I would suggest that rightly the court would impose a high duty on an employer. But in the circumstances of this case the tiny hole was undiscoverable either by the employers or the claimant and the findings of the recorder negatived any such breach."
Personal Protective Equipment at Work Regulations 1992
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Knott v Newham Healthcare NHS Trust [2003] EWCA Civ 771
13 May 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Pigford v Sunderland [2003] EWCA Civ 823
16 May 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Torts - Other

[ Bailii ]
 
Goodman v Keeves [2003] EWCA Civ 800
19 May 2003
CA
Tuckey LJ
negligence, Personal Injury
The claimant was a back seat passenger in a car. She could have used a seat belt but would have had to recover it from below the seat. She suffered severe injuries in a crash. The court considered extent of contributorily negligence.
[ Bailii ]
 
Hole v Ross-Skinner [2003] EWCA Civ 774
20 May 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Bell, Multiple claimants v Ministry of Defence (1) and (2) Times, 29 May 2003; [2003] EWHC 1134 (QB)
21 May 2003
QBD
Owen J
Armed Forces, Health and Safety, Personal Injury
The claimants sought damages for psychiatric injury for stress and anxiety in being engaged on the behalf of the respondent in the course of combat. Held: The defendant had no duty to maintain a safe system of work for military personnel during combat operations. The term 'combat' must be given a wide meaning. The immunity was not limited to accasions when an enemy was present, but extended to all activities directed against an enemy where the service personnel were at risk of attack themselves.
Crown Proceedings Act 1947
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ]
 
King v Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions [2003] EWCA Civ 730
23 May 2003
CA
Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Schiemann Lord Justice Sedley
Road Traffic, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Josephine Murray and others v Greenock Dockyard Limited [2003] ScotCS 164; 2004 SLT 346
4 Jun 2003
SCS
J. Gordon Reid, QC
Scotland, Personal Injury, Damages
The deceased contracted mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos, and died. He and the pursuer had married in 1959 at 21. They were married over 41 years, and had one child. The marriage had its ups and downs, and for a time during the 1980s was difficult. The deceased was drinking heavily and the pursuer had left the matrimonial home with their daughter to give him a "wee fright", but returned after two weeks. He undertook to cut back on his drinking and normal married life was resumed. Held: The marriage was generally happy and that there was a close loving relationship between them. Over the last ten years before his death the pursuer looked after the deceased and was devoted to him and in his last year organised her day so that she could be with him. The deceased was a heavy smoker and had a breathless turn in 1999. During the course of subsequent investigation the mesothelioma was diagnosed. He underwent radiotherapy (three fractions). His GP subsequently recorded that pain did not seem to be a problem. In the last year of his life the deceased was less unfortunate than some mesothelioma sufferers. He did not suffer quite as much pain and discomfort as some, and awarded £20,000 to the pursuer in respect of her section 1(4) claim, and £47,500 to her as executrix in respect of her section 2(1) claim for solatium.
1 Citers

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Bonser v UK Coal Mining Ltd Times, 30 June 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 1296; [2004] IRLR 164
9 Jun 2003
CA
Lord Phillips MR
Health and Safety, Personal Injury
The employer appealed a finding that it was responsible in negligence to a staff member for stress related injury at work. The claimant had worked in the coal industry for 20 years, but she had then been made redundant. The defendants took her on as their Technical Support and Training Manager. Her reference said that she "would not be particularly good in a highly stressful environment but she is good at dealing with IT users, training and communication." She had a pre-existing emotional vulnerability but this was not apparent to the defendants. Held: Lord Phillips MR said: "An employer will be in breach of duty to an employee if the employer subjects the employee to severe pressure of work in circumstances where the employer knows, or ought reasonably to foresee, that this is likely to cause the employee to suffer some form of breakdown which results in psychiatric injury. Happily most employees are sufficiently robust to withstand the stress of a heavy workload. Thus it is normally necessary to demonstrate, before breach of duty can be established, that the employer had particular reason to apprehend the danger that such injury would be caused to the individual employee." The defendants did not have reason to apprehend the danger and accordingly were not liable when she broke down.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Channel Islands Knitwear Company Limited v Hotchkiss; PC 16-Jun-2003 - [2003] UKPC 45
 
Burns v Burns and Another [2003] NIQB 44
20 Jun 2003
QBNI

Northern Ireland, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Price v Price (Trading As Poppyland Headware) [2003] EWCA Civ 888; Times, 28 July 2003; [2003] 3 All ER 911
26 Jun 2003
CA
Lord Justice Brooke Lady Justice Hale Lord Justice Sedley
Personal Injury, Civil Procedure Rules
The claimant sought damages from his wife for personal injuries. He had been late beginning the claim, and it was served without particulars. He then failed to serve the particulars within 14 days. Totty and then Sayers had clarified the procedure for applications for extension of time. Held: The lower courts had failed to apply the rules as required by Sayers. The tension is between the interests of the administration of justice and the effect which the granting of relief would have on each party. Here the claimant had failed entirely to do what he ought under the rules. Justice could be achieved by a Walsh v Messeldine order, restricting the claimant to the issues and evidence made known the defendant before his default.
Civil Procedure Rules 3.9
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Leitch v Reid [2003] NIQB 45
27 Jun 2003
QBNI
Nicholson LJ
Northern Ireland, Personal Injury
The claimant was injured falling from a ladder on the defendant's farm. The ladder was home built. Held: The ladder was kept by the defendants for maintenance purposes, and there was an implicit aagreement that the claimant should use it. The plaintiff was an experienced workman, and should have inspected it better himself, and was therefrore himself 50% liable through contributory negligence.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
In re Deep Vein Thrombosis and Air Travel Group Litigation Times, 14 July 2003; Gazette, 18 September 2003
3 Jul 2003
CA
Phillips of Worth Matravers MR, Judg, Kay LJJ
Personal Injury, Transport
Passengers on air flights who had suffered deep vein thrombosis through inactivity whilst travelling sought damages. Held: The claim in its nature was for something unrelated to any particular event. The word 'accident' necessitated some sort of event, an 'unexpected or unusual event or happening that is external to the passenger' and a failure to warn of the danger could not itself be an accident. The Convention provided the exclusive jurisdiction for claims against carriers. The claim failed.
Warsaw Convention on International Carriage by Air 1929 17
1 Cites

1 Citers


 
Willemse v Hesp [2003] EWCA Civ 994
11 Jul 2003
CA
Lord Justice Potter Lady Justice Arden And Lord Justice Keene
Personal Injury, Damages
The defendant appealed an award of damages to the claimant after a road accident. He had been constructing a boat, and had reduced earnings during this period. Held: This was a classic case for a Smith v Manchester-type award, rather than the selection of a multiplicand even on an 'educated guess' basis. The claimant had undoubtedly suffered reduced earning capacity and was at a disadvantage in the future labour market and the development of his career, but the level of his actual earnings loss depended on how far he sought to decide to work full-time and/or to develop his career in a way which had not been demonstrated before the accident. The award was reduced accordingly.
Judicial Studies Board Guidelines for the Assessment of Damages in Personal Injury Cases
[ Bailii ]
 
Davidson v Lothian and Borders Fire Board [2003] ScotCS 203
18 Jul 2003
IHCS
Lord Marnoch, Lord Hamilton, Lord Macfadyen
Scotland, Health and Safety, Personal Injury
The pursuer, a firefighter, sought damages for injury incurred during a drill. The drill involved manipulating a ladder, which was caught by the wind, a known risk in such exercises. Held: The defenders had failed to discharge the burden on them of establishing that all appropriate steps were taken to reduce the risk of injury to the pursuer and his fellow employees to the lowest level reasonably practicable, as was required of them under Regulations.
Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992 4(1)(b)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Lucas v Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust [2003] EWCA Civ 1102; Times, 28 August 2003; Gazette, 02 October 2003
23 Jul 2003
CA
Waller, Mantell, Laws LJJ
Evidence, Personal Injury, Civil Procedure Rules
The claimant appealed an order requiring him to disclose to the defendants the terms of the instructions given to the expert witness. Held: Rule 35.10(4) restriction applied to prevent the defendant from obtaining an order for the inspection he sought.
Civil Procedure Rules 31.14(2) 35.10(4)
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Collins v Tesco Stores Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1308
24 Jul 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Health and Safety

[ Bailii ]
 
Eagle v Chambers [2003] EWCA Civ 1107; Times, 01 September 2003; [2004] RTR 115
24 Jul 2003
CA
Ward, Waller, Hale LJJ
Negligence, Road Traffic, Personal Injury, Damages
The claimant was severely injured when run down by the defendant driving his car. She was in Blackpool, and drunk and wandering in the highway. The defendant was himself at or near the drink driving limit. She appealed against a finding that she was 60% to blame. Held: Courts have consistently required drivers to recognise that they control dangerous machinery. It would be rare for a driver not to have greater responsibilty than a pedestrian for injury. In this case the claimant would be held 40% responsible.
Lady Justice Hale said: "The potential 'destructive disparity' between the parties can readily be taken into account as an aspect of blameworthiness" and "It is rare indeed for a pedestrian to be found more responsible than a driver unless the pedestrian has suddenly moved into the path of an oncoming vehicle. That is not this case. The Court has consistently imposed upon the drivers of cars a high burden to reflect the fact that the car is potentially a dangerous weapon".
Hale LJ said that the court could not avoid comparing the two parties: "We also accept that this court is always reluctant to interfere with the trial judge's judgment of what apportionment between the parties is 'just and equitable' under the 1945 Act. But a finding as to which, if either, of the parties was the more responsible for the damage is different from a finding as to the precise extent of a less than 50 per cent contribution. There is a qualitative difference between a finding of 60 per cent contribution and a finding of 40 per cent which is not so apparent in the quantitive difference between 40 per cent and 20 per cent. It is rare indeed for a pedestrian to be found more responsible than a driver unless the pedestrian has suddenly moved into the path of an oncoming vehicle. That is not this case. The court 'has consistently imposed upon the drivers of cars a high burden to reflect the fact that the car is potentially a dangerous weapon': Latham LJ in Lunt v Khelifa [2002] EWCA Civ 801."
Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 1(1)
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Salter v UB Frozen Chilled Foods [2003] ScotCS 212; Times, 06 October 2003
25 Jul 2003
OHCS
Gordon Reid QC
Scotland, Personal Injury
The pursuer was involved in an accident at work, where his co-worker died. He suffered only psychiatric injury. Held: Being directly involved, the pursuer was a primary victim, and accordingly not subject to the limits on claiming for psychological injury alone. There was no need for him to show any duty toward the claimant to avoid psychological damage. Psychiatric injury was arguable forseeable, and was not therefore irrelevant.
1 Cites

[ Bailii ]
 
Pratley v Surrey County Council [2003] EWCA Civ 1067; [2004] ICR 159
25 Jul 2003
CA
Mance LJ, Buxton LJ
Personal Injury
The claimant sought damages for personal injury namely stress suffered in the course of her work as a care manager. She said that she had been overworked, and suffered depression when a proposal for reducing the work load remained unimplemented. The court at first instance held that the system of working imposed upon the claimant involved a foreseeable risk of injury to her in the long term, but not a foreseeable risk of imminent injury, so her claim failed. Held: The court set out 16 principles to be looked at when assessing such a claim. "There is a potentially relevant distinction between a risk of psychiatric injury arising from continuing overload in the future, and a risk of collapse in the short-term arising from disappointment of a 'cherished idea' developed as a result of a conversation about possible problems if there was continuing work overload over a further period. The harm in each case is psychiatric injury, but not only does it occur by quite different mechanisms, more importantly it occurs at quite different times. It follows that the judge was right to consider whether the risk of imminent collapse was foreseeable, which he held was not." Buxton LJ: "It is not the act but the consequences on which tortious liability is founded. The defendant will be deemed liable for those consequences, not because he has caused them in the course of some careless or otherwise undesirable activity, but only if they were caused by his failure to take precautions against a foreseen or foreseeable and legally relevant danger." The appeal failed.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Edward James Mason v First Leisure Corporation Plc [2003] EWHC 1814 (QB)
30 Jul 2003
QBD
The Honourable Mr Justice Tugendhat
Personal Injury, Limitation

[ Bailii ]
 
Practice Direction (No 3) (Coal Mining hand / arm vibration syndrome: Vibration white finger) Times, 16 October 2003
31 Jul 2003
QBD

Litigation Practice, Personal Injury
The court gave directions revising the arrangements for the disposal of the actions referred to.

 
Taylor v Smith and others [2003] ScotCS 220; 2003 SCLR 926
5 Aug 2003
OHCS
Lord Carloway And Lord Justice Clerk And Lord Macfadyen
Personal Injury
action of damages for personal injury arising out of a road accident
[ Bailii ]
 
Simonds v Isle of Wight Council Times, 09 October 2003; Gazette, 16 October 2003
23 Sep 2003
QBD
Gross J
Personal Injury
The claimant sought damages, having been injured at a school sports day. The school had carried out a risk asessment and acknowledged a risk of injury. Held: Not every risk identified could or should be controlled. The injury occurred whilst in fact the child was in the care of his mother. It did not arise from any lack of supervision. Common sense said this was an accident to which liability should not attach.
1 Cites


 
Dickens v Bearman [2003] EWCA Crim 1397
2 Oct 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Clark v Hosier and Dickson Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1467
14 Oct 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Construction

[ Bailii ]
 
Cooke, Sheppard, Page v United Bristol Health Care, Stibbe and Another, Lee [2003] EWCA Civ 1370; Times, 24 October 2003; Gazette, 13 November 2003
16 Oct 2003
CA
Lord Justice Laws Lord Justice Dyson Lord Justice Carnwath
Damages, Personal Injury
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 settlements. Attempts to show that rises would be more substantial trended to undermine that system, and should be resisted by the courts. Attempts to separate out such costs were nothing but 'smoke and mirrors'. At a political level, the discount rate might be reset, but at a judicial level it could not be.
Damages Act 1996 1(1) - Damages (Personal Injury) Order 2001 (2001 No 201)
1 Cites


 
Cooke v United Bristol Health Care [2003] EWCA Civ 1370
16 Oct 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Damages

[ Bailii ]
 
Raitt v Lunn [2003] EWCA Civ 1449
22 Oct 2003
CA
Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Rix Lord Justice Carnwath
Personal Injury, Damages

[ Bailii ]
 
Thornley v Lang [2003] EWCA Civ 1484; Times, 31 October 2003; [2004] 1 Costs LR 91; [2004] 1 All ER 886; [2004] 1 WLR 378
29 Oct 2003
CA
Lord Justice Mummery, Lord Justice Tuckey, Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers MR
Personal Injury, Costs
The claimant had pursued the case under a collective conditional fee agreement, organised by her trade union. The defendant challenged an order for payment of the costs, arguing that under the indemnity principle, the claimant would be under no duty to pay costs, and that therefore there he was denied her claim by the indemnity principle. Held: The claimant was under a duty to pay his legal costs, and therefore could recover his costs even against the indemnity principle. The agreement with the lawyers was a collective conditional fee agreement and therefore not covered by the main Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations.
Lord Phillips MR referred to cases where litigants are funded by third parties such as trade unions: "When defeated by such a litigant, unsuccessful parties have, on occasion, invoked the indemnity principle in an attempt to avoid paying costs. The argument advanced has been that the successful litigant is not liable for his costs and, therefore, has no right to recover them. The courts have had no truck with such arguments. They have defeated them by finding that, in the circumstances under consideration, the litigant comes under an independent obligation, albeit one that is unlikely to be enforced, to pay the fees of the solicitor who is acting for him"
Courts and Legal Services Act 1990 58 - Collective Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 (2000 No 2988) - Conditional Fee Agreements Regulations 2000 (2000 No 692)
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Fletcher v Containerbase (Manchester) Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1635
31 Oct 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Limitation

[ Bailii ]
 
Pinnington v Crossleigh Construction [2003] EWCA Civ 1684
3 Nov 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Damages

[ Bailii ]
 
Laudanska v The University of Abertay [2003] ScotSC 54
4 Nov 2003
ScSf
J. Gordon Reid, QC
Personal Injury

1 Cites

[ Bailii ]

 
 Bygrave v Thomas Cook Tour Operations Ltd; CA 5-Nov-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1631
 
Lovett v Arthur Andersen and Co and others [2003] EWCA Civ 1946
5 Nov 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Kerry Anne Drinkall (A Minor Who Sues By Her Mother and Litigation Friend) v Dean Harry Whitwood [2003] EWCA Civ 1547; Times, 13 November 2003
6 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Thomas
Personal Injury, Litigation Practice
The claimant, a child, had sought damages. An agreement was made to compromise the claim. Later the child sought to withdraw from it. Held: No court order had been made to approve the compromise, and therefore no binding arrangement existed. Dietz was binding and clear. Estoppel might have been available in different circumstances.
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Michael John Bottomley v Todmorden Cricket Club [2003] EWCA Civ 1575; Times, 13 November 2003; Gazette, 02 January 2004; [2004] PIQR 276
7 Nov 2003
CA
Lord Justice Brooke Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Waller
Personal Injury, Torts - Other
The claimant was very badly injured at a bonfire organised by the defendants. He had been asked to help with a part of the display, organised by sub-contractors, which exploded as he was filling it. Held: The nature of the activity to be carried out, the discharge of pyrotechnics as part of a dramatic entertainment, required particular care in the choice of contractor. No proper or sufficient checks had been carried out. Insurance was importance to the issue of reasonable care in the choice of a reasonably competent independent contractor. The 1957 Act did nothing to weaken the effect of the judgment of this court in Honeywill. The club had not done what it ought to have done and was liable.
Occupiers' Liability Act 1957
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ Bailii ]

 
 Lambie v Toffolo Jackson Limited (In Liq) and Another; OHCS 11-Nov-2003 - [2003] ScotCS 282; 2003 SLT 1415
 
Major v Lamyman [2003] EWCA Civ 1701
12 Nov 2003
CA

Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Direct Travel Insurance v McGeown [2003] EWCA Civ 1606; [2004] 1 All ER (Comm) 609
12 Nov 2003
CA
Auld, Mummery, Keene LJJ
Personal Injury, Contract
The contra proferentem rule is to be invoked only in cases of genuine doubt or ambiguity. Auld LJ said: "A court should be wary of starting its analysis by finding an ambiguity by reference to the words in question looked at on their own. And it should not, in any event, on such a finding, move straight to the contra proferentem rule without first looking at the context and, where appropriate, permissible aids to identifying the purpose of the commercial document of which the words form part. Too early recourse to the contra proferentem rule runs the danger of 'creating' an ambiguity where there is none".
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
John James William Booth v Simon White [2003] EWCA Civ 1708
18 Nov 2003
CA

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

[ Bailii ]
 
Prigmore v Welbourne [2003] EWCA Civ 1687
21 Nov 2003
CA

Damages, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Cooper v Carillion Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 1811
2 Dec 2003
CA

Personal Injury, Negligence

[ Bailii ]
 
McDonnell v Congregation of Christian Brothers Trustees (Formerly Irish Christian Brothers) and others [2003] UKHL 63; Times, 05 December 2003; [2004] 1 AC 1101
4 Dec 2003
HL
Lord Bingham of Cornhill Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead Lord Steyn Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough Lord Rodger of Earlsferry
Limitation, Personal Injury
In 2000, the claimant sought damages for sexual abuse from before 1951. The issue was as to whether the limitation law which applied was that as at the date of the incidents, or that which applied as at the date when he would be deemed uner the modern law to have acquired knowledge of the possibility of claiming. Held: Though the 1963 Act, consolidated in the 1980 Act, was framed to remedy the injustice of Cartledge, it did not extend the law to override an accrued statutory time bar to pre-1954 six-year claims: "an accrued right to plead a time bar, which is acquired after the lapse of the statutory period, is in every sense a right, even though it arises under an Act which is procedural. It is a right which is not to be taken away by conferring on the statute a retrospective operation, unless such a construction is unavoidable." The decision in Arnold was not so wrong as to allow the House to depart from it. The claim failed.
Limitation Act 1939 2(1) 22
1 Cites

1 Citers

[ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ]
 
Avis Bennett (James Bennet's Representatives) v the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeal Panel for Judicial Review To Refuse Compensation [2003] ScotCS 305
9 Dec 2003
OHCS
Lord Carloway
Scotland, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ] - [ ScotC ]
 
Green v Bannister [2003] EWCA Civ 1819
16 Dec 2003
CA

Road Traffic, Personal Injury

[ Bailii ]
 
Yorkshire Traction Company Limited v Searby [2003] EWCA Civ 1856
19 Dec 2003
CA
Lord Justice Chadwick Lord Justice May Lord Justice Pill
Health and Safety, Personal Injury
Buses had not been fitted with safety screens protecting drivers from possible assaults by passengers. Held: There was no breach of regulation 4: "... It does not follow that liability is established simply by showing that it is reasonably foreseeable that the absence of a screen may leave the way open to injury to the driver. A consideration of the degree of risk involved in the absence of a screen is also necessary in assessing suitability".
Provision and Use of Work Equipment Regulations 1992
1 Citers

[ Bailii ]
 
Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.