Gawler v Raettig

Gawler v Raettig

Permission to appeal is refused because the appeal is academic, there is no pressing public interest in determining the issues in the absence of parties with a real interest in the outcome, and the case does not meet the rare criteria for entertaining an academic appeal in private litigation.

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 (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Application for permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Contributory Negligence, Damages, Seat Belt Defence, Academic Appeals
Tort Law Civil Procedure Contributory Negligence Damages Seat Belt Defence Academic Appeals

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 13 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 (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal should grant permission to appeal in a case that is now academic between the parties
  2. 2 Whether the principles in Froom v Butcher regarding contributory negligence for failure to wear a seat belt should be revisited or departed from

Ratio Decidendi

Permission to appeal is refused because the appeal is academic, there is no pressing public interest in determining the issues in the absence of parties with a real interest in the outcome, and the case does not meet the rare criteria for entertaining an academic appeal in private litigation.

Court Disposition

Application for permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal is refused.