Co-Operative Group (CWS) Ltd v Pritchard [2011] EWCA Civ 329 (28 March 2011)

Co-Operative Group (CWS) Ltd v Pritchard [2011] EWCA Civ 329 (28 March 2011)

Contributory negligence is not available as a defence to claims for assault and battery under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, as there was no such defence at common law for intentional torts. The trial judge erred in rejecting the expert evidence that the claimant's psychiatric injury would have occurred within 1-2 years in any event; damages should be reduced accordingly.

Citation
[2011] EWCA Civ 329
Parties
Appellant/defendant: CO-OPERATIVE GROUP (CWS) LIMITED; Respondent/claimant: MISS DEBORAH PRITCHARD
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed on contributory negligence; allowed on causation; damages to be reduced in line with expert evidence that psychiatric injury would have occurred within 1-2 years regardless of assault.
Legal Topics
Assault and Battery, Vicarious Liability, Contributory Negligence, Causation, Damages
Tort Law Employment Law Assault and Battery Vicarious Liability Contributory Negligence Causation Damages

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CO-OPERATIVE GROUP (CWS) LIMITED

Appellant/defendant

MISS DEBORAH PRITCHARD

Respondent/claimant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether contributory negligence is a defence to a claim for assault and battery under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge correctly assessed causation and quantum of damages for psychiatric injury following an assault

Ratio Decidendi

Contributory negligence is not available as a defence to claims for assault and battery under the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945, as there was no such defence at common law for intentional torts. The trial judge erred in rejecting the expert evidence that the claimant's psychiatric injury would have occurred within 1-2 years in any event; damages should be reduced accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed on contributory negligence; allowed on causation; damages to be reduced in line with expert evidence that psychiatric injury would have occurred within 1-2 years regardless of assault.

Orders

  • Damages to be recalculated to reflect acceleration of psychiatric injury by 1-2 years only.
  • No reduction for contributory negligence.