Evans v Kosmar Villa Holidays Plc [2007] EWCA Civ 1003 (23 October 2007)

Evans v Kosmar Villa Holidays Plc [2007] EWCA Civ 1003 (23 October 2007)

The tour operator did not owe a duty to warn or protect the claimant against the obvious risk of diving into a shallow pool, which was known or should have been known to him; therefore, there was no breach of contractual or statutory duty, and causation was not established.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2007] EWCA Civ 1003
Parties
Claimant/respondent: James Evans; Defendant/appellant: Kosmar Villa Holidays plc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Obvious Risk Doctrine, Package Travel Regulations, Occupiers' Liability, Contributory Negligence
Contract Law Personal Injury Travel Law Duty of Care Obvious Risk Doctrine Package Travel Regulations Occupiers' Liability Contributory Negligence

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

James Evans

Claimant/respondent

Kosmar Villa Holidays plc

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tour operator owed a duty of care to warn or protect against the obvious risk of diving into a shallow pool
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of contract or statutory duty under the Package Travel Regulations
  3. 3 Whether causation was established between any breach and the injury

Ratio Decidendi

The tour operator did not owe a duty to warn or protect the claimant against the obvious risk of diving into a shallow pool, which was known or should have been known to him; therefore, there was no breach of contractual or statutory duty, and causation was not established.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; claim dismissed

Orders

  • Judgment for the defendant; claimant's claim dismissed