The house considered the benevolence rule: ‘I do not see any analogy at all between the generosity of private subscribers to a fund for the victims of some disaster, who also have claims for damages against a tortfeasor, and the state providing subventions for the needy out of funds which, in one way or another, have been subscribed compulsorily by various classes of citizens. The concept of public benevolence by the state is one I find difficult to comprehend.’
Judges:
Lord Bridge of Harwich
Citations:
[1985] AC 20, [1984] 1 All ER 874
Statutes:
Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act 1978
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Hodgson v Trapp HL 10-Nov-1988
The question was whether the attendance and mobility allowances which were payable to the plaintiff pursuant to statute should be deducted from damages she had received for personal injury.
Held: They should be. Damages for negligence are . .
Cited – Pirelli General Plc and others v Gaca CA 26-Mar-2004
The claimant was awarded damages from his employers, who claimed that the benefits received by the claimant from an insurance policy to which the defendants had contributed should be set off against the claim.
Held: McCamley was no longer good . .
Cited – Notcutt v Universal Equipment Company (London) Ltd CA 14-Mar-1986
The Court was asked to consider the application of the doctrine of frustration to a periodic contract of employment, which is determinable by short or relatively short notice where the contract is said to have been frustrated by the illness or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Employment
Updated: 29 April 2022; Ref: scu.195739