David Mayall v Merriman White & Ors

David Mayall v Merriman White & Ors

Section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 does not relieve a contribution claimant from proving the negligence and causation of the contribution defendant; the trial judge erred in treating the earlier High Court judgment as determinative of negligence and in failing to require proof of causation, particularly in the absence of evidence from the original claimant. The contribution claim failed for lack of proof of causation and proper pleading of negligence.

Parties
Former Claimant: Richard Terence Percy; Defendant / Additional Claimant / Respondent to the Appeal: Merriman White; Defendant / Additional Claimant / Respondent to the Appeal: Raymond St John Murphy; Additional Defendant / Appellant to the Appeal: David Mayall
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Contribution Claim Under Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978
Outcome
Appeal allowed; contribution claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Contribution Between Tortfeasors, Professional Negligence of Barristers and Solicitors, Reflective Loss, Abuse of Process, Causation in Negligence, Derivative Claims, Settlement and Contribution Proceedings
Civil Procedure Professional Negligence Contribution Contribution Between Tortfeasors Professional Negligence of Barristers and Solicitors Reflective Loss Abuse of Process Causation in Negligence +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 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richard Terence Percy

Former Claimant

Merriman White

Defendant / Additional Claimant / Respondent to the Appeal

Raymond St John Murphy

Defendant / Additional Claimant / Respondent to the Appeal

David Mayall

Additional Defendant / Appellant to the Appeal

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Contribution Claim Under Civil Liability (contribution) Act 1978

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 relieves a contribution claimant from proving negligence and causation against a contribution defendant
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in treating the earlier High Court judgment as determinative of negligence in contribution proceedings
  3. 3 Whether the failure to call the original claimant (Mr Percy) was fatal to establishing causation in the contribution claim

Ratio Decidendi

Section 1(4) of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978 does not relieve a contribution claimant from proving the negligence and causation of the contribution defendant; the trial judge erred in treating the earlier High Court judgment as determinative of negligence and in failing to require proof of causation, particularly in the absence of evidence from the original claimant. The contribution claim failed for lack of proof of causation and proper pleading of negligence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; contribution claim dismissed.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed.
  • The contribution claim by Merriman White against David Mayall is dismissed.