Farrugia v Burtenshaw & Ors [2014] EWHC 1036 (QB) (08 April 2014)

Farrugia v Burtenshaw & Ors [2014] EWHC 1036 (QB) (08 April 2014)

The claimant is entitled to damages assessed on the basis of a 24-hour care regime with two carers during the day and at night, subject to future review, as this is reasonable and proportionate to his unpredictable and complex needs. Periodical payments are appropriate and reasonably secure. The life expectancy multiplier is set at 20.5, reflecting the impact of PEG feeding and epilepsy. Damages for future care are not made provisional or variable for epilepsy risk as the evidence does not justify it.

Citation
[2014] EWHC 1036 (QB)
Parties
Claimant: Jack Farrugia (by his Mother and Litigation Friend Lorraine Farrugia); First Defendant: Steven Burtenshaw; Second Defendant: The Motor Insurers Bureau (in substitution for Zurich Insurance PLC); Third Defendant: Quinn Insurance Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Personal Injury Claim (road Traffic Accident) / Trial on Quantum (assessment of Damages)
Outcome
Claim allowed in part (quantum determined); damages awarded as periodical payments for future care and case management, with lump sums for other agreed heads of loss.
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Future Care Costs, Periodical Payments, Life Expectancy, Provisional Damages, Catastrophic Injury, Road Traffic Act 1988 S.151
Personal Injury Insurance Law Civil Procedure Assessment of Damages Future Care Costs Periodical Payments Life Expectancy Provisional Damages +2 more

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jack Farrugia (by his Mother and Litigation Friend Lorraine Farrugia)

Claimant

Steven Burtenshaw

First Defendant

The Motor Insurers Bureau (in substitution for Zurich Insurance PLC)

Second Defendant

Quinn Insurance Limited

Third Defendant

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Claim (road Traffic Accident) / Trial on Quantum (assessment of Damages)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate quantum of damages for the claimant's catastrophic injuries?
  2. 2 What is the reasonable and proportionate future care and case management regime for the claimant?
  3. 3 Should damages for future care be awarded as periodical payments or lump sum?

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant is entitled to damages assessed on the basis of a 24-hour care regime with two carers during the day and at night, subject to future review, as this is reasonable and proportionate to his unpredictable and complex needs. Periodical payments are appropriate and reasonably secure. The life expectancy multiplier is set at 20.5, reflecting the impact of PEG feeding and epilepsy. Damages for future care are not made provisional or variable for epilepsy risk as the evidence does not justify it.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed in part (quantum determined); damages awarded as periodical payments for future care and case management, with lump sums for other agreed heads of loss.

Orders

  • Damages for future care and case management to be paid by periodical payments by the Third Defendant.
  • Lump sum awards for agreed heads of loss (past care, Court of Protection costs, etc.).