Manna v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 12 (18 January 2017)

Manna v Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2017] EWCA Civ 12 (18 January 2017)

The award for the cost of a second adapted home for the claimant's father was upheld as within the reasonable ambit of judicial discretion, given the fact-specific history of shared care and the claimant's best interests. The use of the claimant's life multiplier in the Roberts v Johnstone calculation was also upheld, as the defendant had not objected at trial and the proceedings were conducted on that basis. The order for indemnity costs from 11 June 2015 was upheld in part, specifically due to the defendant's unsustainable case at trial, though not for their conduct in settlement negotiations.

Citation
[2017] EWCA Civ 12
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Lamarieo Manna (A Child and Protected Party by his Father and Litigation Friend Samuel Manna); Defendant/appellant: Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment upheld.
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Accommodation Claims, Costs Orders, Care Needs, Roberts V Johnstone Principle
Clinical Negligence Personal Injury Damages Assessment of Damages Accommodation Claims Costs Orders Care Needs Roberts V Johnstone Principle

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lamarieo Manna (A Child and Protected Party by his Father and Litigation Friend Samuel Manna)

Claimant/respondent

Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is entitled to damages for the cost of a second adapted home for overnight stays with his father
  2. 2 Whether the Roberts v Johnstone calculation should use the claimant's or the father's life multiplier for the second home
  3. 3 Whether indemnity costs should be awarded against the defendant from a specified date

Ratio Decidendi

The award for the cost of a second adapted home for the claimant's father was upheld as within the reasonable ambit of judicial discretion, given the fact-specific history of shared care and the claimant's best interests. The use of the claimant's life multiplier in the Roberts v Johnstone calculation was also upheld, as the defendant had not objected at trial and the proceedings were conducted on that basis. The order for indemnity costs from 11 June 2015 was upheld in part, specifically due to the defendant's unsustainable case at trial, though not for their conduct in settlement negotiations.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; High Court judgment upheld.

Orders

  • Award for cost of second adapted home for claimant's father upheld.
  • Roberts v Johnstone calculation to use claimant's life multiplier upheld.