Gray v Thames Trains Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2008] EWCA Civ 713 (25 June 2008)

Gray v Thames Trains Ltd & Anor (Rev 1) [2008] EWCA Civ 713 (25 June 2008)

The ex turpi causa principle does not bar the claimant's claim for loss of earnings after the manslaughter because the claim is not inextricably bound up with or linked to the criminal act; the loss of earnings is not so closely connected with the manslaughter that allowing recovery would condone the crime. Issues of causation and contributory fault must be determined at trial.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 713
Parties
Appellant/claimant: Kerrie Francis Gray; Respondent/defendant: Thames Trains Limited; Respondent/defendant: Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (formerly known as Railtrack PLC)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed on the ex turpi causa point; further issues remitted to the High Court for determination.
Legal Topics
Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio, Causation, Contributory Negligence, Damages, Mental Health and Criminal Acts
Tort Law Personal Injury Public Policy Ex Turpi Causa Non Oritur Actio Causation Contributory Negligence Damages Mental Health and Criminal Acts

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 5 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kerrie Francis Gray

Appellant/claimant

Thames Trains Limited

Respondent/defendant

Network Rail Infrastructure Limited (formerly known as Railtrack PLC)

Respondent/defendant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the doctrine of ex turpi causa non oritur actio precludes the claimant from recovering loss of earnings after committing manslaughter caused by PTSD resulting from the defendants' negligence.
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's loss of earnings is inextricably linked with his criminal act such that public policy bars recovery.
  3. 3 Whether the chain of causation was broken by the claimant's criminal act or whether contributory negligence applies.

Ratio Decidendi

The ex turpi causa principle does not bar the claimant's claim for loss of earnings after the manslaughter because the claim is not inextricably bound up with or linked to the criminal act; the loss of earnings is not so closely connected with the manslaughter that allowing recovery would condone the crime. Issues of causation and contributory fault must be determined at trial.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed on the ex turpi causa point; further issues remitted to the High Court for determination.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed on the ex turpi causa point.
  • Issues of foreseeability, causation, and contributory fault are remitted to the High Court for determination.