Bhamra v Dubb (t/a Lucky Caterers)

Bhamra v Dubb (t/a Lucky Caterers)

Given the religious context, the caterer owed a duty to avoid serving food containing eggs. The appellant knew or ought to have known that ras malai from some sources might contain eggs and failed to take reasonable care to ensure the food was egg-free. The combination of religious expectation, the appellant's knowledge, and the absence of precautions established breach of duty, making the appellant liable for the resulting injury.

Parties
Claimant/respondent: Amarjit Kaur Bhamra (Suing as widow and administratrix of the estate of Kuldip Singh Bhamra, deceased); Defendant/appellant: Prem Dutt Dubb (Trading as Lucky Caterers)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; trial judgment upheld for the claimant.
Legal Topics
Duty of Care, Food Allergy Liability, Breach of Duty, Burden of Proof, Catering Liability, Religious Dietary Requirements
Tort Law Negligence Personal Injury Duty of Care Food Allergy Liability Breach of Duty Burden of Proof Catering Liability +1 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Amarjit Kaur Bhamra (Suing as widow and administratrix of the estate of Kuldip Singh Bhamra, deceased)

Claimant/respondent

Prem Dutt Dubb (Trading as Lucky Caterers)

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a professional caterer owes a duty of care to guests with food allergies in the context of religious dietary requirements
  2. 2 Whether the caterer breached that duty by serving food containing egg at a Sikh wedding
  3. 3 Whether the burden of proof shifted to the defendant to show reasonable care was taken

Ratio Decidendi

Given the religious context, the caterer owed a duty to avoid serving food containing eggs. The appellant knew or ought to have known that ras malai from some sources might contain eggs and failed to take reasonable care to ensure the food was egg-free. The combination of religious expectation, the appellant's knowledge, and the absence of precautions established breach of duty, making the appellant liable for the resulting injury.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; trial judgment upheld for the claimant.

Orders

  • Judgment for the respondent in the agreed sum of £415,000.