Gawler v Raettig [2007] EWCA Civ 1560 (03 December 2007)

Gawler v Raettig [2007] EWCA Civ 1560 (03 December 2007)

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal because the appeal was academic, there was no public interest justifying an exception, and the issues should be determined in a case with parties having a real interest in the outcome. The guidelines in Froom v Butcher remain binding and appropriate for such cases.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 1560
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Michael Victor Gawler; Defendant/applicant: Paul Raettig
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
03 December 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal (civil Division)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Personal Injury, Seat Belt Law, Academic Appeals, Damages Reduction
Tort Law Civil Procedure Contributory Negligence Personal Injury Seat Belt Law Academic Appeals Damages Reduction

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Michael Victor Gawler

Claimant/respondent

Paul Raettig

Defendant/applicant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Application for Permission to Appeal to the Court of Appeal (civil Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal should grant permission to appeal in an academic case where the underlying dispute is resolved and the appeal would not affect the parties' rights
  2. 2 Whether the guidelines in Froom v Butcher regarding contributory negligence for failure to wear a seat belt should be revisited or increased above 25% reduction in damages

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal refused permission to appeal because the appeal was academic, there was no public interest justifying an exception, and the issues should be determined in a case with parties having a real interest in the outcome. The guidelines in Froom v Butcher remain binding and appropriate for such cases.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Permission to appeal refused.