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