Learn about the purpose of damages in legal proceedings, the types of damages awarded, key terms like special and general damages, and a real case study involving a motor-scooter accident. Explore how damages aim to compensate claimants for losses incurred due to negligence, with a focus on financial and non-financial aspects.
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
The Civil Process Accident/Claim * Evidence collected * Case prepared * Negotiations Trial Award * Trial Court prove duty, breach and damage * Verdict * Award of damages
The purpose of damages The purpose is to put the claimant in the position he or she would have been in had the negligent event not occurred The law is not concerned with punishing the defendant only compensating the claimant The claimant should not profit from the award of damages. Therefore the claimant must follow the principle of mitigation of loss (taking reasonable steps to minimise loss) In practice the claimant simply needs to act reasonably. For example in the even of an unwanted pregnancy as a result of a negligently performed sterilisation it would not be reasonable to expect the claimant to undergo an abortion
The purpose of damages The claimant can only claim once even if several people contributed to the accident Damages can be reduced to take into account the conduct of the claimant; this is known as contributory negligence. The reduction is in proportion to the claimant s contribution to the accident. E.g. not wearing a seatbelt and having more severe injuries as a result of the accident. Where there is PI involved it is usual to get a quantum ( a preliminary figure of the amount of damages likely to be awarded) This encourages settlement outside of court
Damages: Key terms Special Damages: Compensation for the financial losses up to the date of trial for example the cost of repairing the damaged vehicle General Damages: These cover any losses that do not have a quantifiable sum attached to them 1. Pecuniary Losses: The claimants financial losses such as loss of future earnings 2. Non-pecuniary Losses: The claimants non-financial losses such as pain and suffering
Pain, suffering and loss of amenity Damages General Damages Special Damages Future medical care and personal assistance Loss of future earnings Financial losses up to date of trial
Jefford v Gee On 30th November, 1966, Mr Jefford was riding his motor-scooter along Archway Road in North London. Mrs Gee drove her motor-car so negligently that she ran into him and knocked him off the scooter. His head was badly cut. Three teeth were knocked out. He had a broken wrist. But, worst of all, he had a badly broken right leg. He has had many operations for it but has never recovered the full use of it. He has been off work a long time. On 25th July, 1967, the plaintiff issued a writ claiming damages. Liability was admitted. The defendant paid into Court 4,250 in satisfaction of the claim. The plaintiff did not take it out. The trial was held on 16th June, 1969. The Judge awarded a sum of 5,651.lis.6d. It was made up as follows:- Special Damages 2,131.11s.6d. General Damages 3,500. 0s.0d. Mr Kidwell, Counsel for the plaintiff, asked for interest on the whole or part of the sum awarded. The Judge allowed no interest on the Special Damages. But he allowed interest at 6 % Per annum on the General Damages of 3,500 for 2 years, that is, from the date of the accident, 30th November, 1966, to the date of trial, 16th June, 1969. The total interest came to 568.15s.0d.
Donnelly v Joyce Christopher Stefan Donnelly was involved in a road accident at West Ham Lane, London, on 2nd December, 1968. He was then 6 years of age. He sustained injuries to his right leg as a result of contact with the wheel of a 7-ton lorry driven by the defendant, Mr. Henry Joyce. The boy, through his father, Christopher Donnelly, as next friend, brought an action against Mr. Joyce claiming that the accident was caused by his negligence. The writ was issued on 5th April, 1971. The allegation of negligence was denied. The precise circumstances of the accident, and its cause, were in dispute at the trial. That the conclusion as to liability was not easy or obvious is clear from the judgment of the trial judge, Mr. Michael Eastham, Q.C., sitting as a Deputy Judge of the High Court. However, the learned judge on balance held that negligence on the part of the defendant was established. In view of the age of the infant plaintiff, no question of contributory negligence by him was raised. Judgment was given in favour of the plaintiff in the sum of 4,689.39.
Method of Payment of Damages Traditionally all damages were paid in a lump sum (one off payment in full) Today, there is recognition that lump sum payments are essential for loss or damage to good but periodical payments (annually/monthly) are more suitable if the claimant needs a regular income for the rest of his/her life PI damages of this nature are called structure settlements (Damages Act 1996) The main advantage to structure settlements is the certainty and security that they provide the claimant. Particularly where the claimant is a child and prevent over or under compensation.
Mitigation? Where have we seen this term before? What does it mean? To mitigate the loss? We would need to use the scenario detail / quotes to provide evidence of a claimant s mitigation. What might this look like?
Task Having bought herself a cheap windsurfer, Ursula Langer decided to teach herself to windsurf on a lake near her home. After several hours of practice, she began to tire and decide to have one last attempt at crossing the lake. She failed to notice Vera Unsworth, who was fishing from a boat on the lake. Unfortunately Ursula crashed into the boat, which capsized, and Vera lost her expensive fishing equipment in the lake. The equipment cost 2000 and the boat needed 400 worth of repairs. Vera suffered some injuries, including being cut by a fish hook which embedded itself in her cheek. She now has a permanent scar and has been advised that she is likely to be awarded 1500 in damages for her injuries. Identify the type of damages that can be claimed in this case Explain how the court would go about calculating the amount of damages
June 2011 Robyn fitted a handrail over the bath for Elsie, her elderly and very overweight aunt. A few days later, when Elsie was getting out of the bath, the handrail came away from the wall. Elsie fell backwards into the bath and suffered severe head injuries. If this matter were to be taken to court, it is estimated that a successful claim in negligence would result in damages exceeding 100 000, excluding the minor damage to the bathroom. Assuming that Robyn were found liable in negligence, explain how the court would calculate an award of damages to Elsie. (7 marks)
June 2011 (mark scheme) (A) Explanation of the calculation of damages. This could include: general and special damages; heads of damage (damage to property + expenses incurred, loss of future earnings, loss of amenity, pain and suffering, tariff award based on the injury itself); mitigation; structure of awards (lump sum or structured settlement). (B) Application to Elsie (personal injury + pain and suffering, loss of amenity, additional care needed and minor property damage). Case/example in support, eg Jefford v Gee, Donnelly v Joyce, etc. NB Max 5 if no application.
Jan 2012 Brian was visiting his friend, Elaine. Elaine was very keen to show off the garden seat that she had put together from a self- assembly pack. Unfortunately, Elaine had not fitted the seat together properly. When Brian sat on the seat, it collapsed. Although Brian suffered only minor injuries, his new phone was smashed as he fell. The phone would cost 400 to replace. A few minutes later, Brian was unable to receive a call on his phone offering him work which would have earned him a profit of 6000. Assuming that Elaine were to be found liable in negligence, explain how the court would calculate an award of damages to Brian. (8 marks)
Jan 2012 (mark scheme) (A) Explanation of the calculation of damages. This could include: general and special damages heads of damage (damage to property and expenses incurred, loss of future earnings, loss of amenity, pain and suffering, tariff award based on the injury itself) mitigation structure of awards (lump sum or structured settlement). (B) Application to Brian (general damages personal injury and pain and suffering, loss of amenity, additional care needed, loss of future earnings and special damages for the phone and quantifiable loss of earnings up to trial).
