Smithurst v Sealant Construction Services Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 1277 (03 November 2011)

The judge erred in treating the issue as one of causation, but the acceleration approach to damages was permissible and fairly reflected the medical evidence; the appeal is dismissed.

Citation: [2011] EWCA Civ 1277
Parties: Claimant/appellant: Mark Simon Smithurst; Defendant/respondent: Sealant Construction Services Ltd
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 03 November 2011
Procedural Posture: Personal Injury Negligence Appeal / Appeal From Assessment of Damages
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Causation, Assessment of Damages, Acceleration Approach, Contributory Negligence

Tort Personal Injury Negligence Causation Assessment of Damages Acceleration Approach Contributory Negligence

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 7 Party arguments 2

Parties

Mark Simon Smithurst

Claimant/appellant

Sealant Construction Services Ltd

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Personal Injury Negligence Appeal / Appeal From Assessment of Damages

Legal Issues

1 Whether the judge erred in treating the issue as one of causation rather than assessment of damages
2 Whether the acceleration approach to damages was appropriate given the medical evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred in treating the issue as one of causation, but the acceleration approach to damages was permissible and fairly reflected the medical evidence; the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Assessment of damages to proceed on acceleration approach; claimant entitled to damages for two years at full rate, nothing thereafter.