Russell v Wincanton Ltd

Russell v Wincanton Ltd

The trial judge was entitled to accept the evidence of the claimant and supporting witnesses as credible, and to find that the head injury and subsequent stroke were caused as alleged, notwithstanding inconsistencies in the claimant's account, which were explained by his dysphasia. The appeal court will not interfere with the trial judge's findings of fact where there is no clear error.

Parties
Respondent/claimant: Russell; Appellant/defendant: Wincanton Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 March 2003
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Liability
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Employer's Liability, Causation, Assessment of Evidence

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Russell

Respondent/claimant

Wincanton Ltd

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court Judgment on Liability

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's head injury was caused by a load bar emerging from a trailer as alleged
  2. 2 Whether the stroke suffered by the claimant was caused by the head injury sustained at work
  3. 3 Whether inconsistencies in the claimant's account undermine his credibility and the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge was entitled to accept the evidence of the claimant and supporting witnesses as credible, and to find that the head injury and subsequent stroke were caused as alleged, notwithstanding inconsistencies in the claimant's account, which were explained by his dysphasia. The appeal court will not interfere with the trial judge's findings of fact where there is no clear error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Costs to respondent, subject to detailed assessment if not agreed