Guntrip v Ministry Of Defence [2002] EWCA Civ 892 (18 June 2002)

Guntrip v Ministry Of Defence [2002] EWCA Civ 892 (18 June 2002)

Permission to appeal is granted because there are arguable grounds that the trial judge misdirected himself on the burden of proof regarding mitigation and that the calculation of damages for accommodation may have been incorrect, particularly in light of the Roberts v Johnstone approach.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 892
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Kenneth William Guntrip; Defendant/applicant: Ministry of Defence
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Stay Application
Outcome
Permission to appeal granted; stay of execution on accommodation element granted; application to introduce fresh evidence adjourned; costs to be costs in the appeal.
Legal Topics
Accommodation Claims, Assessment of Damages, Mitigation of Loss, Contributory Negligence, Fresh Evidence on Appeal
Personal Injury Damages Accommodation Claims Assessment of Damages Mitigation of Loss Contributory Negligence Fresh Evidence on Appeal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth William Guntrip

Claimant/respondent

Ministry of Defence

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Permission to Appeal and Stay Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's need for bungalow accommodation was a reasonable necessity resulting from the defendant's admitted liability
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge misdirected himself regarding the burden of proof and mitigation of loss
  3. 3 Whether the calculation of damages for accommodation was correct, including the application of Roberts v Johnstone principles

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is granted because there are arguable grounds that the trial judge misdirected himself on the burden of proof regarding mitigation and that the calculation of damages for accommodation may have been incorrect, particularly in light of the Roberts v Johnstone approach.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal granted; stay of execution on accommodation element granted; application to introduce fresh evidence adjourned; costs to be costs in the appeal.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal allowed.
  • Stay of execution in respect of the accommodation element of the claim in the sum of £74,411.20 allowed.