The plaintff sought damages after a collision, but the car had already been damaged in a previous accident, the repair of which would cover the second accident. Lord Evershed MR said: ‘In my judgment in the present case the defendant should be taken to have injured a motor-car that was already in certain respects (that is in respect of the need for respraying) injured; with the result that to the extent of that need or injury the damage claimed did not flow from the defendant’s wrongdoing. It may no doubt be unfortunate for the plaintiffs that the collisions took place in the order in which they did.’
Donovan LJ said: ‘The question as I see it is this: what extra burden in the matter of respraying was put upon the plaintiff company by the second collision? To my mind the answer must be: None, for the earlier collision had already imposed the burden of respraying upon them.’
Judges:
Lord Evershed MR, Harman LJ, Donovan LJ
Citations:
[1961] EWCA Civ 3, [1961] 3 All ER 413, [1961] 3 WLR 749, [1962] 1 QB 33
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Halsey v Milton Keynes General NHS Trust etc CA 11-May-2004
The court considered the effect on costs orders of a refusal to take part in alternate dispute resolution procedures. The defendant Trust had refused to take the dispute to a mediation. In neither case had the court ordered or recommended ADR.
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Road Traffic
Updated: 24 November 2022; Ref: scu.262813